Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
Common usage term.Civil Aviation Rules
(CAR) Part 1.
Not specifically defined. INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS
AND RECOMMENDED PRACTICES
CHAPTER 1. GENERALIntroductory Note.— Annex 14, Volume II, contains
Standards and Recommended Practices (specifications) that
prescribe the physical characteristics and obstacle
limitation surfaces to be provided for at heliports, and
certain facilities and technical services normally provided at
a heliport. It is not intended that these specifications limit or
regulate the operation of an aircraft.
When designing a heliport, the critical design
helicopter, having the largest set of dimensions and the
greatest maximum take-off mass (MTOM) the heliport is
intended to serve, would need to be considered.
It is to be noted that provisions for helicopter flight
operations are contained in Annex 6, Part III.
Definitions
When the following terms are used in this volume they have
the meanings given below. Annex 14, Volume I, contains
definitions for those terms which are used in both volumes.
Accuracy. A degree of conformance between the estimated or
measured value and the true value.
Note.— For measured positional data, the accuracy is
normally expressed in terms of a distance from a stated
position within which there is a defined confidence of the
true position falling.
10/1/2014 Page 1 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Definition
Australian/New Zealand
Standard AS/NZ ISO
19108:2003.
Calendar. Discrete temporal reference system that provides
the basis for defining temporal position to a resolution of
one day (ISO 19108*).
___________________________________
* ISO Standard 19108, Geographic information — Temporal schema
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Cyclic redundancy check (CRC). A mathematical algorithm
applied to the digital expression of data that provides a
level of assurance against loss or alteration of data.
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Definition
AC139-8, 3.3.2.D. The largest overall dimension of the helicopter when
rotor(s) are turning measured from the most forward
position of the main rotor tip path plane to the most
rearward position of the tail rotor tip path plane or
helicopter structure.
Note.— “D” is sometimes referred to in the text using the
terminology “D-value”.
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Definition
Airways Corporation of
New Zealand Manual of
Air Traffic Services
(MATS) RAC 1.
Data quality. A degree or level of confidence that the data
provided meet the requirements of the data user in terms
of accuracy, resolution and integrity.
10/1/2014 Page 2 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
Common usage term.CARs. Not specifically defined.Datum. Any quantity or set of quantities that may serve as a
reference or basis for the calculation of other quantities
(ISO 19104**).
___________________________________
** ISO Standard 19104, Geographic information — Terminology
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Declared distances — heliports.
a) Take-off distance available (TODAH). The length of
the FATO plus the length of helicopter clearway (if
provided) declared available and suitable for
helicopters to complete the take-off.
b) Rejected take-off distance available (RTODAH).
The length of the fFATO declared available and
suitable for helicopters operated in performance
class 1 to complete a rejected take-off.
c) Landing distance available (LDAH). The length of
the FATO plus any additional area declared available
and suitable for helicopters to complete the landing
manoeuvre from a defined height.
10/1/2014 Page 3 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
Note: New Zealand has
no heliports that could
be classed as supporting
international operations.
Although it could be
argued that this entire
Volume is therefore not
applicable, selected
elements have been
incorporated in Advisory
Circular AC139-8. This
AC gives guidance for
the establishment of
heliports in populous
areas, and in para 1.1.1,
notes that the AC is not
exhaustive, and refers the
reader to Annex 14 Vol II
for further guidance.
Compliance data for
SARPs are referenced
mainly to the AC.
CARs. Not specifically defined.Dynamic load-bearing surface. A surface capable of
supporting the loads generated by a helicopter
conducting an emergency touchdown on it.
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Definition
Advisory Circular
AC139-8 Definitions.
Elevated heliport. A heliport located on a raised structure.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Ellipsoid height (Geodetic height). The height related to the
reference ellipsoid, measured along the ellipsoidal outer
normal through the point in question.
10/1/2014 Page 4 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Definition
AC139-8 Definitions.Final approach and take-off area (FATO). A defined area
over which the final phase of the approach manoeuvre to
hover or landing is completed and from which the take-off
manoeuvre is commenced. Where the FATO is to be used
by helicopters operated in performance class 1, the
defined area includes the rejected take-off area available.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Geodetic datum. A minimum set of parameters required to
define location and orientation of the local reference
system with respect to the global reference system/frame.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Geoid undulation. The distance of the geoid above (positive)
or below (negative) the mathematical reference ellipsoid.
Note.— In respect to the World Geodetic System — 1984
(WGS-84) defined ellipsoid, the difference between the
WGS-84 ellipsoidal height and orthometric height
represents WGS-84 geoid undulation.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Geoid. The equipotential surface in the gravity field of the
Earth which coincides with the undisturbed mean sea
level (MSL) extended continuously through the
continents.
Note.— The geoid is irregular in shape because of local
gravitational disturbances (wind tides, salinity, current,
etc.) and the direction of gravity is perpendicular to the
geoid at every point.
10/1/2014 Page 5 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Definition
AS/NZS ISO 19108:2003.Gregorian calendar. Calendar in general use; first introduced
in 1582 to define a year that more closely approximates
the tropical year than the Julian calendar (ISO 19108***).
Note.— In the Gregorian calendar, common years have
365 days and leap years 366 days divided into twelve
sequential months.
____________________________________
*** ISO Standard 19108, Geographic information — Temporal
schema
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Definition
Advisory Circular (AC)
139-8 Definitions.
Helicopter air taxiway. A defined path on the surface
established for the air taxiing of helicopters.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Helicopter clearway. A defined area on the ground or water,
selected and/or prepared as a suitable area over which a
helicopter operated in performance class 1 may accelerate
and achieve a specific height.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Helicopter ground taxiway. A ground taxiway intended for
the ground movement of wheeled undercarriage
helicopters.
10/1/2014 Page 6 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Helicopter stand. An aircraft stand which provides for
parking a helicopter and where ground taxi operations are
completed or where the helicopter touches down and lifts
off for air taxi operations.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
AC139-8. Not specifically defined.Helicopter taxi-route. A defined path established for the
movement of helicopters from one part of a heliport to
another. A taxi-route includes a helicopter air or ground
taxiway which is centred on the taxi-route.
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Definition
AC139-8 Definitions.Helideck. A heliport located on a fixed or floating offshore
facility such as an exploration and/or production unit
used for the exploitation of oil or gas.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
AC139-8. Not specifically defined.Heliport elevation. The elevation of the highest point of the
FATO.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
AC139-8 Aerodrome
Design: Heliports.
Not specifically defined.Heliport reference point (HRP). The designated location of a
heliport or a landing location.
10/1/2014 Page 7 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Definition
AC139-8 Definitions.Heliport. An aerodrome or a defined area on a structure
intended to be used wholly or in part for the arrival,
departure and surface movement of helicopters.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Integrity (aeronautical data). A degree of assurance that an
aeronautical data and its value has not been lost nor
altered since the data origination or authorized
amendment.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Integrity classification (aeronautical data). Classification
based upon the potential risk resulting from the use of
corrupted data. Aeronautical data is classified as:
a) routine data: there is a very low probability when
using corrupted routine data that the continued safe
flight and landing of an aircraft would be severely at
risk with the potential for catastrophe;
b) essential data: there is a low probability when using
corrupted essential data that the continued safe
flight and landing of an aircraft would be severely at
risk with the potential for catastrophe; and
c) critical data: there is a high probability when using
corrupted critical data that the continued safe flight
and landing of an aircraft would be severely at risk
with the potential for catastrophe.
10/1/2014 Page 8 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
AC139-8. Not specifically defined.Landing location. A marked or unmarked area that has the
same physical characteristics as a visual heliport final
approach and take-off area (FATO).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
AC139-6. Current AC wording does
not include c).
Obstacle. All fixed (whether temporary or permanent) and
mobile objects, or parts thereof, that:
a) are located on an area intended for the surface
movement of aircraft; or
b) extend above a defined surface intended to protect
aircraft in flight; or
c) stand outside those defined surfaces and that have
been assessed as being a hazard to air navigation.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Orthometric height. Height of a point related to the geoid,
generally presented as an MSL elevation.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
AC139-8. Not specifically defined.Point-in-space (PinS) visual segment. This is the segment of
a helicopter PinS approach procedure from the MAPt to
the landing location for a PinS “proceed visually”
procedure. This visual segment connects the
Point-in-space (PinS) to the landing location.
Note.— The procedure design criteria for a PinS
approach and the detailed design requirements for a visual
segment are established in the Procedures for Air Navigation
Services — Aircraft Operations, (PANS-OPS, Doc 8168).
10/1/2014 Page 9 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
AC139-8. Not specifically defined.Point-in-space approach (PinS). The Point-in-space
approach is based on GNSS and is an approach
procedure designed for helicopter only. It is aligned with
a reference point located to permit subsequent flight
manoeuvring or approach and landing using visual
manoeuvring in adequate visual conditions to see and
avoid obstacles.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Protection area. An area within a taxi-route and around a
helicopter stand which provides separation from objects,
the FATO, other taxi-routes and helicopter stands, for
safe manoeuvring of helicopters.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Rejected take-off area. A defined area on a heliport suitable
for helicopters operating in performance class 1 to
complete a rejected take-off.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
AC139-8. Not specifically defined.Runway-type FATO. A FATO having characteristics similar
in shape to a runway.
10/1/2014 Page 10 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Definition
AC139-8 Definitions.Safety area. A defined area on a heliport surrounding the
FATO which is free of obstacles, other than those
required for air navigation purposes, and intended to
reduce the risk of damage to helicopters accidentally
diverging from the FATO.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
Common usage term.CARs. Not specifically defined.Shipboard heliport. A heliport located on a ship that may be
purpose or non-purpose-built. A purpose-built shipboard
heliport is one designed specifically for helicopter
operations. A non-purpose-built shipboard heliport is
one that utilizes an area of the ship that is capable of
supporting a helicopter but not designed specifically for
that task.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Static load-bearing surface. A surface capable of supporting
the mass of a helicopter situated upon it.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Station declination. An alignment variation between the zero
degree radial of a VOR and true north, determined at the
time the VOR station is calibrated.
10/1/2014 Page 11 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Definition
AC139-8 Definitions.Surface level heliport. A heliport located on the ground or on
a structure on the surface of the water.
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Definition
Note: the AC definition
uses the abbreviation
"TALO".
AC139-8 Definitions.Touchdown and lift-off area (TLOF). An area on which a
helicopter may touch down or lift off.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Definition
CARs. Not specifically defined.Winching area. An area provided for the transfer by
helicopter of personnel or stores to or from a ship.
10/1/2014 Page 12 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Standard
AC139-8.
1.2.1
1.2 Applicability
Note.— The dimensions discussed in this Annex are
based on consideration of single-main-rotor helicopters. For
tandem-rotor helicopters the heliport design will be based
on a case-by-case review of the specific models using the
basic requirement for a safety area and protection areas
specified in this Annex. The specifications of the main
chapters of this Annex are applicable for visual heliports
that may or may not incorporate the use of a Point-in-space
approach or departure. Additional specifications for
instrument heliports with non-precision and/or precision
approaches and instrument departures are detailed in
Appendix 2. The specifications of this Annex are not
applicable for water heliports (touchdown or lift-off on the
surface of the water).
The interpretation of some of the specifications in the Annex
expressly requires the exercising of discretion, the taking of a
decision or the performance of a function by the appropriate
authority. In other specifications, the expression appropriate
authority does not actually appear although its inclusion is
implied. In both cases, the responsibility for whatever
determination or action is necessary shall rest with the State
having jurisdiction over the heliport.
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Standard
AC139-6, AC139-8.
1.2.2
The specifications in Annex 14, Volume II, shall apply to all
heliports intended to be used by helicopters in international
civil aviation. They shall apply equally to areas for the
exclusive use of helicopters at an aerodrome primarily meant
for the use of aeroplanes. Where relevant, the provision of
Annex 14, Volume I, shall apply to the helicopter operations
being conducted at such an aerodrome.
10/1/2014 Page 13 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 1
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
1.2.3
Unless otherwise specified, the specification for a colour
referred to within this volume shall be that contained in
Appendix 1 to Annex 14, Volume I.
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Standard
AIPNZ GEN 2.1, 2.
1.3.1.1
1.3 Common reference systems
1.3.1 Horizontal reference system
World Geodetic System — 1984 (WGS-84) shall be used as
the horizontal (geodetic) reference system. Reported
aeronautical geographical coordinates (indicating latitude and
longitude) shall be expressed in terms of the WGS-84 geodetic
reference datum.
Note.— Comprehensive guidance material concerning
WGS-84 is contained in the World Geodetic System — 1984
(WGS-84) Manual (Doc 9674).
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Standard
See definitions "altitude"
and "elevation" for
application of datum.
CAR Part 1.
1.3.2.1
1.3.2 Vertical reference system
Mean sea level (MSL) datum, which gives the relationship of
gravity-related height (elevation) to a surface known as the
geoid, shall be used as the vertical reference system.
N1.The geoid globally most closely approximates MSL.
It is defined as the equipotential surface in the gravity field
of the Earth which coincides with the undisturbed MSL
extended continuously through the continents.
N2.Gravity-related heights (elevations) are also
referred to as orthometric heights while distances of points
above the ellipsoid are referred to as ellipsoidal heights.
10/1/2014 Page 14 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 1
Reference
Standard
CAR 172.101(a)(1).
1.3.3.1
1.3.3 Temporal reference system
The Gregorian calendar and Coordinated Universal Time
(UTC) shall be used as the temporal reference system.
Not ApplicableChapter 1
Reference
Standard
1.3.3.2
When a difference temporal reference system is used, this
shall be indicated in GEN 2.1.2 of the Aeronautical Information
Publication (AIP).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.1.1
CHAPTER 2. HELIPORT DATA
2.1 Aeronautical data
Determination and reporting of heliport-related aeronautical
data shall be in accordance with the accuracy and integrity
requirements set forth in Tables A1-1 to A1-5 contained in
Appendix 1 while taking into account the established quality
system procedures. Accuracy requirements for aeronautical
data are based upon a 95 per cent confidence level and in that
respect, three types of positional data shall be identified:
surveyed points (e.g. FATO threshold), calculated points
(mathematical calculations from the known surveyed points of
points in space, fixes) and declared points (e.g. flight
information region boundary points).
Note.— Specifications governing the quality system are
given in Annex 15, Chapter 3.
10/1/2014 Page 15 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.1.2
Contracting States shall ensure that integrity of aeronautical
data is maintained throughout the data process from
survey/origin to the next intended user. Based on the
applicable integrity classification, the validation and
verification procedures shall:
a) for routine data: avoid corruption throughout the
processing of the data;
b) for essential data: assure corruption does not occur
at any stage of the entire process and may include
additional processes as needed to address potential
risks in the overall system architecture to further
assure data integrity at this level; and
c) for critical data: assure corruption does not occur at
any stage of the entire process and include
additional integrity assurance procedures to fully
mitigate the effects of faults identified by thorough
analysis of the overall system architecture as
potential data integrity risks.
Note.— Guidance material in respect to the processing
of aeronautical data and aeronautical information is
contained in RTCA Document DO-200B and European
Organization for Civil Aviation Equipment (EUROCAE)
Document ED-76B — Standards for Processing Aeronautical
Data.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.1.3
Protection of electronic aeronautical data while stored or in
transit shall be totally monitored by the cyclic redundancy
check (CRC). To achieve protection of the integrity level of
critical and essential aeronautical data as classified in 2.1.2, a
32- or 24-bit CRC algorithm shall apply respectively.
10/1/2014 Page 16 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Recommendation
CARs. Not specified.
2.1.4
Recommendation.— To achieve protection of the integrity
level of routine aeronautical data as classified in 2.1.2, a
16-bit CRC algorithm should apply.
Note.— Guidance material on the aeronautical data
quality requirements (accuracy, resolution, integrity,
protection and traceability) is contained in the World
Geodetic System — 1984 (WGS-84) Manual (Doc 9674).
Supporting material in respect of the provisions of Appendix
1 related to accuracy and integrity of aeronautical data is
contained in RTCA Document DO-201A and European
Organization for Civil Aviation Equipment (EUROCAE)
Document ED-77 — Industry Requirements for Aeronautical
Information.
No DifferenceChapter 2
Reference
Standard
AIPNZ GEN 2.1, 3.
2.1.5
Geographical coordinates indicating latitude and longitude
shall be determined and reported to the aeronautical
information services authority in terms of the World Geodetic
System — 1984 (WGS-84) geodetic reference datum,
identifying those geographical coordinates which have been
transformed into WGS-84 coordinates by mathematical means
and whose accuracy of original field work does not meet the
requirements in Appendix 1, Table A1-1.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.1.6
The order of accuracy of the field work shall be such that the
resulting operational navigation data for the phases of flight
will be within the maximum deviations, with respect to an
appropriate reference frame, as indicated in the tables
contained in Appendix 1.
10/1/2014 Page 17 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.1.7
In addition to the elevation (referenced to mean sea level) of
the specific surveyed ground positions at heliports, geoid
undulation (referenced to the WGS-84 ellipsoid) for those
positions as indicated in Appendix 1 shall be determined and
reported to the aeronautical information services authority.
N1.An appropriate reference frame is that which enables
WGS-84 to be realized on a given heliport and with respect
to which all coordinate data are related.
N2.Specifications governing the publication of WGS-84
coordinates are given in Annex 4, Chapter 2, and Annex 15,
Chapter 3.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.2.1
2.2 Heliport reference point
A heliport reference point shall be established for a heliport or
a landing location not collocated with an aerodrome.
Note.— When the heliport or landing location is
collocated with an aerodrome, the established aerodrome
reference point serves both aerodrome and heliport or
landing location.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.2.2
The heliport reference point shall be located near the initial or
planned geometric centre of the heliport or landing location
and shall normally remain where first established.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.2.3
The position of the heliport reference point shall be measured
and reported to the aeronautical information services
authority in degrees, minutes and seconds.
10/1/2014 Page 18 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.3.1
2.3 Heliport elevation
The heliport elevation and geoid undulation at the heliport
elevation position shall be measured and reported to the
aeronautical information services authority to the accuracy of
one-half metre or foot.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
Note: New Zealand has
no heliports designated
for use by international
civil aviation.
CARs. Not specified.
2.3.2
The elevation of the TLOF and/or the elevation and geoid
undulation of each threshold of the FATO (where
appropriate) shall be measured and reported to the
aeronautical information services authority to the accuracy of
one-half metre or foot.
Note.— Geoid undulation must be measured in
accordance with the appropriate system of coordinates.
10/1/2014 Page 19 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 2.1 Item g) is not specified; i) is
not applicable.2.4.1
2.4 Heliport dimensions and related information
The following data shall be measured or described, as
appropriate, for each facility provided on a heliport:
a) heliport type — surface-level, elevated, shipboard or
helideck;
b) TLOF — dimensions to the nearest metre or foot,
slope, surface type, bearing strength in tonnes (1
000kg);
c) FATO — type of FATO, true bearing to
one-hundredth of a degree, designation number
(where appropriate), length and width to the nearest
metre or foot, slope, surface type;
d) safety area — length, width and surface type;
e) helicopter ground taxiway and helicopter air taxiway
— designation, width, surface type;
f) apron — surface type, helicopter stands;
g) clearway — length, ground profile; and
h) visual aids for approach procedures, marking and
lighting of FATO, TLOF, helicopter ground taxiways,
helicopter air taxiways and helicopter stands.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.4.2
The geographical coordinates of the geometric centre of the
TLOF and/or of each threshold of the FATO (where
appropriate) shall be measured and reported to the
aeronautical information services authority in degrees,
minutes, seconds and hundredths of seconds.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.4.3
The geographical coordinates of appropriate centre line
points of helicopter ground taxiways and helicopter air
taxiways shall be measured and reported to the aeronautical
information services authority in degrees, minutes, seconds
and hundredths of seconds.
10/1/2014 Page 20 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.4.4
The geographical coordinates of each helicopter stand shall
be measured and reported to the aeronautical information
services authority in degrees, minutes, seconds and
hundredths of seconds.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.4.5
The geographical coordinates of obstacles in Area 2 (the part
within the heliport boundary) and in Area 3 shall be measured
and reported to the aeronautical information services
authority in degrees, minutes, seconds and tenths of seconds.
In addition, the top elevation, type, marking and lighting (if
any) of obstacles shall be reported to the aeronautical
information services authority.
N1.See Annex 15, Appendix 8, for graphical illustrations
of obstacle data collection surfaces and criteria used to
identify obstacles in Areas 2 and 3.
N2.Appendix 1 to this Annex provides requirements for
obstacle data determination in Areas 2 and 3.
N3.Implementation of Annex 15, provision 10.6.1.2,
concerning the availability, as of 18 November 2010, of
obstacle data according to Area 2 and Area 3 specifications
would be facilitated by appropriate advance planning for
the collection and processing of such data.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.5
Declared distances
The following distances to the nearest metre or foot shall be
declared, where relevant, for a heliport:
a) take-off distance available;
b) rejected take-off distance available; and
c) landing distance available.
10/1/2014 Page 21 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.6.1
2.6 Coordination between aeronautical information services
and heliport authorities
To ensure that aeronautical information services units obtain
information to enable them to provide up-to-date pre- flight
information and to meet the need for in-flight information,
arrangements shall be made between aeronautical information
services and heliport authorities responsible for heliport
services to report to the responsible aeronautical information
services unit, with a minimum of delay:
a) information on heliport conditions;
b) the operational status of associated facilities,
services and navigation aids within their area of
responsibility;
c) any other information considered to be of
operational significance.
Not ApplicableChapter 2
Reference
Standard
There are no public-use
heliports with navigation
aids in New Zealand.2.6.2
Before introducing changes to the air navigation system, due
account shall be taken by the services responsible for such
changes of the time needed by the aeronautical information
service for the preparation, production and issue of relevant
material for promulgation. To ensure timely provision of the
information to the aeronautical information service, close
coordination between those services concerned is therefore
required.
10/1/2014 Page 22 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Not ApplicableChapter 2
Reference
Standard
2.6.3
Of a particular importance are changes to aeronautical
information that affect charts and/or computer-based
navigation systems which qualify to be notified by the
aeronautical information regulation and control (AIRAC)
system, as specified in Annex 15, Chapter 6 and Appendix 4.
The predetermined, internationally agreed AIRAC effective
dates in addition to 14 days postage time shall be observed
by the responsible heliport services when submitting the raw
information/data to aeronautical information services.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 2
Reference
Standard
CARs. Not specified.
2.6.4
The heliport services responsible for the provision of raw
aeronautical information/data to the aeronautical information
services shall do that while taking into account accuracy and
integrity requirements for aeronautical data as specified in
Appendix 1 to this Annex.
N1.Specifications for the issue of a NOTAM and
SNOWTAM are contained in Annex 15, Chapter 5, and
Appendices 6 and 2, respectively.
N2.The AIRAC information is distributed by the AIS at
least 42 days in advance of the AIRAC effective dates with
the objective of reaching recipients at least 28 days in
advance of the effective date.
N3.The schedule of the predetermined internationally
agreed AIRAC common effective dates at intervals of 28 days,
including 19 November 2009, and guidance for the AIRAC
use are contained in the Aeronautical Information Services
Manual (Doc 8126, Chapter 2, 2.6).
10/1/2014 Page 23 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.1.
3.1.1
CHAPTER 3. PHYSICAL
CHARACTERISTICS
3.1 Surface-level heliports
N1.The provisions given in this section are based on the
design assumption that no more than one helicopter will be
in the FATO at the same time.
N2.The design provisions given in this section assume
when conducting operations to a FATO in proximity to
another FATO, these operations will not be simultaneous. If
simultaneous helicopter operations are required,
appropriate separation distances between FATOs need to be
determined, giving due regard to such issues as rotor
downwash and airspace, and ensuring the flight paths for
each FATO, defined in Chapter 4, do not overlap.
N3.The specifications for ground taxi-routes and air
taxi-routes are intended for the safety of simultaneous
operations during the manoeuvring of helicopters. However,
the wind velocity induced by the rotor downwash might have
to be considered.
Final approach and take-off areas
A surface-level heliport shall be provided with at least one
final approach and take-off area (FATO).
Note.— A FATO may be located on or near a runway
strip or taxiway strip.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.5.
3.1.2
A FATO shall be obstacle free.
10/1/2014 Page 24 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.2. Performance class is not
differentiated.3.1.3
The dimensions of a FATO shall be:
a) where intended to be used by helicopters operated in
performance class 1, as prescribed in the helicopter
flight manual (HFM) except that, in the absence of
width specifications, the width shall be not less than
the greatest overall dimension (D) of the largest
helicopter the FATO is intended to serve;
b) where intended to be used by helicopters operated in
performance class 2 or 3, of sufficient size and shape
to contain an area within which can be drawn a circle
of diameter not less than:
1) 1 D of the largest helicopter when the maximum
take-off mass (MTOM) of helicopters the FATO
is intended to serve is more than 3.175 kg;
2) 0.83 D of the largest helicopter when the MTOM
of helicopters the FATO is intended to serve is 3
175 kg or less.
Note.— The term FATO is not used in the HFM. The
minimum landing/take-off area specified in the HFM for the
appropriate performance class 1 flight profile is necessary to
determine the size of the FATO. However, for vertical take-off
procedures in performance class 1, the required rejected
take-off area is not normally quoted in the HFM and it will
be necessary to obtain information which includes complete
containment — this figure will always be greater than 1D.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8. Not specified.
3.1.4
Recommendation.— Where intended to be used by
helicopters operated in performance class 2 or 3 with MTOM
of 3 175 kg or less, the FATO should be of sufficient size and
shape to contain an area within which can be drawn a circle
of diameter not less than 1 D.
Note.— Local conditions, such as elevation and
temperature, may need to be considered when determining
the size of a FATO. Guidance is given in the Heliport Manual
(Doc 9261).
10/1/2014 Page 25 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
More Exacting
or Exceeds
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.3. The maximum local slope is
5 per cent.3.1.5
The FATO shall provide rapid drainage but the mean slope in
any direction shall not exceed 3 per cent. No portion of a
FATO shall have a local slope exceeding:
a) 5 per cent where the heliport is intended to be used
by helicopters operated in performance class 1; and
b) 7 per cent where the heliport is intended to be used
by helicopters operated in performance class 2 and 3.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.4. Items b) and c) are not
specified.3.1.6
The surface of the FATO shall:
a) be resistant to the effects of rotor downwash;
b) be free of irregularities that would adversely affect
the take-off or landing of helicopters; and
c) have bearing strength sufficient to accommodate a
rejected take-off by helicopters operated in
performance class 1.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.7
The surface of a FATO surrounding a touchdown and life-off
area (TLOF) intended for use by helicopters operated in
performance classes 2 and 3 shall be static load-bearing.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 3.1. Not specified.
3.1.8
Recommendation.— The FATO should provide ground effect.
10/1/2014 Page 26 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 3.1.26. Provides only for jet efflux
or aeroplane wake
turbulence.3.1.9
Recommendation.— The FATO should be located so as to
minimize the influence of the surrounding environment,
including turbulence, which could have an adverse impact
on helicopter operations.
Note.— Guidance on determining the influence of
turbulence is given in the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261). If
turbulence mitigating design measures are warranted but
not practical, operational limitations may need to be
considered under certain wind conditions.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.10
Helicopter clearways
Note.— A helicopter clearway would need to be
considered when the heliport is intended to be used by
helicopters operating in performance class 1. See the
Heliport Manual (Doc 9261).
When a helicopter clearway is provided, it shall be located
beyond the end of the FATO.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.11
Recommendation.— The width of a helicopter clearway
should not be less than that of the associated safety area (see
Figure 3-1).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.12
Recommendation.— The ground in a helicopter clearway
should not project above a plane having an upward slope of
3 per cent, the lower limit of this plane being a horizontal
line which is located on the periphery of the FATO.
10/1/2014 Page 27 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.13
Recommendation.— An object situated in a helicopter
clearway, which may endanger helicopters in the air, should
be regarded as an obstacle and should be removed.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.7.
3.1.14
Touchdown and lift-off areas
At least one TLOF shall be provided at a heliport.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.15
One TLOF shall be located within the FATO or one or more
TLOFs shall be collocated with helicopter stands. For
runway-type FATOs, additional TLOFs located in the FATO
are acceptable.
Note.— For further guidance see the Heliport Manual
(Doc 9261).
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.8. The circle diameter
specified is 1.5 times the
length or width of the
undercarriage, whichever is
the greater, of the largest
helicopter that the area is
intended to serve.
3.1.16
The TLOF shall be of sufficient size to contain a circle of
diameter of at least 0.83 D of the largest helicopter the area is
intended to serve.
Note.— A TLOF may be any shape.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Slope not to exceed
limitations in flight manual
of helicopters that TLOF is
intended to serve.
3.1.17
Slopes on a TLOF shall be sufficient to prevent accumulation
of water on the surface of the area, but shall not exceed 2 per
cent in any direction.
10/1/2014 Page 28 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.18
Where the TLOF is within the FATO, the TLOF shall be
dynamic load-bearing.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.19
Where a TLOF is collocated with a helicopter stand, the TLOF
shall be static load-bearing and be capable of withstanding
the traffic of helicopters that the area is intended to serve.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.20
Where a TLOF is located within a FATO which can contain a
circle of diameter more than 1 D, the centre of the TLOF shall
be located not less than 0.5 D from the edge of the FATO.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.14.
3.1.21
Safety areas
A FATO shall be surrounded by a safety area which need not
be solid.
10/1/2014 Page 29 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.15. Items a) and b) not
specified.3.1.22
A safety area surrounding a FATO shall extend outwards
from the periphery of the FATO for a distance of at least 3 m
or 0.25 D, whichever is greater, of the largest helicopter the
FATO is intended to serve;
a) each external side of the safety area shall be at least 2
D where the FATO is quadrilateral; or
b) the outer diameter of the safety area shall be at least
2 D where the FATO is circular.
(See Figure 3-1.)
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.23
There shall be a protected side slope rising at 45 degrees from
the edge of the safety area to a distance of 10 m, whose
surface shall not be penetrated by obstacles, except that when
obstacles are located to one side of the FATO only, they may
be permitted to penetrate the side slope surface.
Note.— When only a single approach and take-off climb
surface is provided, the need for specific protected side
slopes would be addressed in the aeronautical study
required in 4.2.7.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.16.
3.1.24
No fixed object shall be permitted above the plane of the
FATO on a safety area, except for frangible objects, which,
because of their function, must be located on the area. No
mobile object shall be permitted on a safety area during
helicopter operations.
10/1/2014 Page 30 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.17.
3.1.25
Objects whose functions requires them to be located on the
safety area shall not;
a) if located at a distance of less than 0.75 D from the
centre of the FATO, penetrate a plane at a height of 5
cm above the plane of the FATO; and
b) if located at a distance of 0.75 D or more from the
centre of the FATO, penetrate a plane originating at
a height of 25 cm above the plane of the FATO and
sloping upwards and outwards at a gradient of 5 per
cent.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.18.
3.1.26
The surface of the safety area, when solid, shall not exceed an
upward slope of 4 per cent outwards from the edge of the
FATO.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.27
Where applicable, the surface of the safety area shall be
treated to prevent flying debris caused by rotor downwash.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.28
When solid, the surface of the safety area abutting the FATO
shall be continuous with the FATO.
10/1/2014 Page 31 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Helicopter ground taxiways
are not provided for.3.1.29
Helicopter ground taxiways and helicopter ground
taxi-routes
N1.A helicopter ground taxiway is intended to permit
the surface movement of a wheeled helicopter under its own
power.
N2.When a taxiway is intended for use by aeroplanes
and helicopters, the provisions for taxiways for aeroplanes
and helicopter ground taxiways will be taken into
consideration and the more stringent requirements will be
applied.
The width of a helicopter ground taxiway shall not be less
than 1.5 times the largest width of the undercarriage (UCW) of
the helicopters the helicopter ground taxiway is intended to
serve (see Figure 3-2).
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.1.30
The longitudinal slope of a helicopter ground taxiway shall
not exceed 3 per cent.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.1.31
A helicopter ground taxiway shall be static load-bearing and
be capable of withstanding the traffic of the helicopters the
helicopter ground taxiway is intended to serve.
10/1/2014 Page 32 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.1.32
A helicopter ground taxiway shall be centred on a ground
taxi-route.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.1.33
A helicopter ground taxi-route shall extend symmetrically on
each side of the centre line for at least 0.75 times the largest
overall width of the helicopters it is intended to serve.
Note.— The part of the helicopter ground taxi-route that
extends symmetrically on each side of the centre line from 0.5
times the largest overall width of the helicopters it is
intended to serve to the outermost limit of the helicopter
ground taxi-route is its protection area.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.1.34
No fixed object shall be permitted above the surface of the
ground on a helicopter ground taxi-route, except for frangible
objects, which, because of their function, must be located
thereon. No mobile object shall be permitted on a ground
taxi-route during helicopter movements.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.1.35
Objects whose function requires them to be located on a
helicopter ground taxi-route shall not:
a) be located at a distance of less than 50 cm from the
edge of the helicopter ground taxiway; and
b) penetrate a plane originating at a height of 25 cm
above the plane of the helicopter ground taxiway, at
a distance of 50 cm from the edge of the helicopter
ground taxiway and sloping upwards and outwards
at a gradient of 5 per cent.
10/1/2014 Page 33 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.1.36
The helicopter ground taxiway and the helicopter ground
taxi-route shall provide rapid drainage but the helicopter
ground taxiway transverse slope shall not exceed 2 per cent.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.1.37
The surface of a helicopter ground taxi-route shall be resistant
to the effect of rotor downwash.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.1.38
For simultaneous operations, the helicopter ground
taxi-routes shall not overlap.
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.22. Two times the overall width
of the helicopters that the
air taxiway is intended to
serve.
3.1.39
Helicopter air taxiways and helicopter air taxi-routes
Note.— A helicopter air taxiway is intended to permit
the movement of a helicopter above the surface at a height
normally associated with ground effect and at ground speed
less than 37 km/h (20 kt).
The width of a helicopter air taxiway shall be at least two times
the largest width of the undercarriage (UCW) of the
helicopters that the helicopter air taxiway is intended to serve
(see Figure 3-3).
10/1/2014 Page 34 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.40
Recommendation.— The surface of a helicopter air taxiway
should be static load-bearing.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.41
Recommendation.— The slopes of the surface of a helicopter
air taxiway should not exceed the slope landing limitations
of the helicopters the helicopter air taxiway is intended to
serve. In any event the transverse slope should not exceed 10
per cent and the longitudinal slope should not exceed 7 per
cent.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.42
A helicopter air taxiway shall be centred on an air taxi-route.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.43
A helicopter air taxi-route shall extend symmetrically on each
side of the centre line for a distance at least equal to the
largest overall width of the helicopters it is intended to serve.
Note.— The part of the helicopter air taxi-route that
extends symmetrically on each side of the centre line from 0.5
times the largest overall width of the helicopters it is
intended to serve to the outermost limit of the helicopter air
taxi-route is its protection area.
10/1/2014 Page 35 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.44
No fixed object shall be permitted above the surface of the
ground on an air taxi-route, except for frangible objects,
which, because of their function, must be located thereon. No
mobile object shall be permitted on an air taxi-route during
helicopter movements.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.45
Objects above ground level whose function requires them to
be located on a helicopter air taxi-route shall not:
a) be located at a distance of less than 1 m from the
edge of the helicopter air taxiway; and
b) penetrate a plane originating at a height of 25 cm
above the plane of the helicopter air taxiway, at a
distance of 1 m from the edge of the helicopter air
taxiway and sloping upwards and outwards at a
gradient of 5 per cent.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.46
Recommendation.— Objects above ground level whose
function requires them to be located on a helicopter air
taxi-route should not:
a) be located at a distance of less than 0.5 times the
largest overall width of the helicopter for which the
helicopter air taxi-route is designed from the centre
line of the helicopter air taxiway; and
b) penetrate a plane originating at a height of 25 cm
above the plane of the helicopter air taxiway, at a
distance of 0.5 times the largest overall width of the
helicopter for which the helicopter air taxi-route is
designed from the centre line of the helicopter air
taxiway, and sloping upwards and outwards at a
gradient of 5 per cent.
10/1/2014 Page 36 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 1.23.3.
3.1.47
The surface of a helicopter air taxi-route shall be resistant to
the effect of rotor downwash.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.23.
3.1.48
The surface of a helicopter air taxi-route shall provide ground
effect.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.49
For simultaneous operations, the helicopter air taxi-routes
shall not overlap.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.50
Helicopter stands
Note.— The provisions of this section do not specify the
location for helicopter stands but allow a high degree of
flexibility in the overall design of the heliport. However, it is
not considered good practice to locate helicopter stands
under a flight path. See the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261) for
further guidance.
When a TLOF is collocated with a helicopter stand, the
protection area of the stand shall not overlap the protection
area of any other helicopter stand or associated taxi route.
10/1/2014 Page 37 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Aprons are not specifically
provided for.3.1.51
The helicopter stand shall provide rapid drainage but the
slope in any direction shall not exceed 2 per cent.
Note.— The requirements on the dimensions of
helicopter stands assume the helicopter will turn in a hover
when operating over a stand.
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.19. Helicopter parking should
be adequate to
accommodate the number of
helicopters to be served. A
design which requires a
helicopter to be parked in a
minimum sized FATO or on
a TALO makes that area
unavailable for take-offs
and landings by other
helicopters.
3.1.52
A helicopter stand intended to be used by helicopters turning
in a hover shall be of sufficient size to contain a circle of
diameter of at least 1.2 D of the largest helicopter the stand is
intended to serve (See Figure 3-4).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.53
Where a helicopter stand is intended to be used for
taxi-through and where the helicopter using the stand is not
required to turn, the minimum width of the stand and
associated protection area shall be that of the taxi-route.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.54
Where a helicopter stand is intended to be used for turning,
the minimum dimension of the stand and protection area shall
be not less than 2 D.
10/1/2014 Page 38 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.55
Where a helicopter stand is intended to be used for turning, it
shall be surrounded by a protection area which extends for a
distance of 0.4 D from the edge of the helicopter stand.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.56
For simultaneous operations, the protection areas of
helicopter stands and their associated taxi-routes shall not
overlap (See Figure 3-5).
Note.— Where non-simultaneous operations are
envisaged, the protection areas of helicopter stands and
their associated taxi-routes may overlap (See Figure 3-6).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.57
A helicopter stand and associated protection area intended to
be used for air taxiing shall provide ground effect.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.58
No fixed objects shall be permitted above the surface of the
ground on a helicopter stand.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.59
No fixed object shall be permitted above the surface of the
ground in the protection area around a helicopter stand except
for frangible objects, which because of their function, must be
located there.
10/1/2014 Page 39 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.60
No mobile object shall be permitted on a helicopter stand and
the associated protection area during helicopter movements.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.61
Objects whose function requires them to be located in the
protection area shall not:
a) if located at a distance of less than 0.75 D from the
centre of the helicopter stand, penetrate a plane at a
height of 5 cm above the plane of the central zone;
and
b) if located at a distance of 0.75 D or more from the
centre of the helicopter stand, penetrate a plane at a
height of 25 cm above the plane of the central zone
and sloping upwards and outwards at a gradient of 5
per cent.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.1.62
The central zone of a helicopter stand shall be capable of
withstanding the traffic helicopters it is intended to serve and
have a static load-bearing area:
a) of diameter not less than 0.83 D of the largest
helicopter it is intended to serve; or
b) for a helicopter stand intended to be used for
taxi-through, and where the helicopter using the
stand is not required to turn, the same width as the
helicopter ground taxiway.
Note.— For a helicopter stand intended to be used for
turning on the ground by wheeled helicopters, the dimension
of the helicopter stand, including the dimension of the
central zone, would need to be significantly increased. See
the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261) for further guidance.
10/1/2014 Page 40 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.25.
3.1.63
Location of a final approach and take-off area in relation
to a runway or taxiway
Where a FATO is located near a runway or taxiway, and
where simultaneous operations are planned, the separation
distance between the edge of a runway or taxiway and the
edge of a FATO shall not be less than the appropriate
dimension in Table 3-1.
Table 3-1. FATO minimum separation distance
If aeroplane mass and/or helicopter mass are
Distance between FATO edge and runway edge or
taxiway edge
up to but not including 3 175 kg 60 m
3 175 kg up to but not including 5 760 kg 120 m
5 760 kg up to but not including 100 000 kg 180 m
100 000 kg and over 250 m
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 3.1.26.
3.1.64
Recommendation.— A FATO should not be located:
a) near taxiway intersections or holding points where
jet engine efflux is likely to cause high turbulence;
or
b) near areas where aeroplane vortex wake
generation is likely to exist.
10/1/2014 Page 41 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.1
3.2 Elevated heliports
N1.The dimensions of the taxi-routes and helicopter
stands include a protection area.
N2.Guidance on structural design for elevated heliports
is given in the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261).
In the case of elevated heliports, design considerations of the
different elements of the heliport shall take into account
additional loading resulting from the presence of personnel,
snow, freight, refuelling, fire fighting equipment, etc.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.2.1.
3.2.2
Final approach and take-off areas and touchdown and
lift-off areas
Note.— On elevated heliports it is presumed that the
FATO and one TLOF will be coincidental.
An elevated heliport shall be provided with one FATO.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.2.1.
3.2.3
A FATO shall be obstacle free.
10/1/2014 Page 42 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.2.1. Performance classes are not
differentiated.3.2.4
The dimensions of the FATO shall be:
a) where intended to be used by helicopters operated in
performance class 1, as prescribed in the helicopter
flight manual (HFM) except that, in the absence of
width specifications, the width shall be not less than
1 D of the largest helicopter the FATO is intended to
serve;
b) where intended to be used by helicopters operated in
performance class 2 or 3, of sufficient size and shape
to contain an area within which can be drawn a circle
of diameter not less than:
1) 1 D of the largest helicopter when the MTOM of
helicopters the FATO is intended to serve is
more than 3 175 kg;
2) 0.83 D of the largest helicopter when the MTOM
of helicopters the FATO is intended to serve is 3
175 kg or less.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 3.2.1. Performance classes are not
differentiated.3.2.5
Recommendation.— Where intended to be used by
helicopters operated in performance class 2 or 3 with MTOM
of 3 175 kg or less, the FATO should be of sufficient size and
shape to contain an area within which can be drawn a circle
of diameter not less than 1 D.
Note.— Local conditions, such as elevation and
temperature, may need to be considered when determining
the size of a FATO. Guidance is given in the Heliport Manual
(Doc 9261).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.1. Maximum overall slope 3
percent, with no portion to
have a local slope
exceeding 5 percent.
3.2.6
Slopes on a FATO at an elevated heliport shall be sufficient to
prevent accumulation of water on the surface of the area, but
shall not exceed 2 per cent in any direction.
10/1/2014 Page 43 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.7
The FATO shall be dynamic load-bearing.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.4. Item b) is not specified.
3.2.8
The surface of the FATO shall be:
a) resistant to the effects of rotor downwash; and
b) free of irregularities that would adversely affect the
take-off or landing of helicopters.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 3.1. Not specified.
3.2.9
Recommendation.— The FATO should provide ground effect.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Clearways are not provided
for.3.2.10
Helicopter clearways
When a helicopter clearway is provided, it shall be located
beyond the end of the rejected take-off area available.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
3.2.11
Recommendation.— The width of a helicopter clearway
should not be less than that of the associated safety area.
10/1/2014 Page 44 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
3.2.12
Recommendation.— When solid, the surface of the helicopter
clearway should not project above a plane having an
upward slope of 3 per cent, the lower limit of this plane
being a horizontal line which is located on the periphery of
the FATO.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
3.2.13
Recommendation.— An object situated on a helicopter
clearway which may endanger helicopters in the air should
be regarded as an obstacle and should be removed.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.2.14
Touchdown and lift-off areas
One TLOF shall be coincidental with the FATO.
Note.— Additional TLOFs may be collocated with
helicopter stands.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.2.15
For a TLOF coincidental with the FATO, the dimensions and
the characteristics of the TLOF shall be the same as those of
the FATO.
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.8. The circle diameter
specified is 1.5 times the
length or width of the
undercarriage, whichever is
the greater, of the largest
helicopter that the area is
intended to serve.
3.2.16
When the TLOF is collocated with a helicopter stand, the
TLOF shall be of sufficient size to contain a circle of diameter
of at least 0.83 D of the largest helicopter the area is intended
to serve.
10/1/2014 Page 45 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
Ac139-8, 3.1.9. Slope not to exceed
limitations in flight manual
of helicopters that TLOF is
intended to serve.
3.2.17
Slopes on a TLOF collocated with a helicopter stand shall be
sufficient to prevent accumulation of water on the surface of
the area, but shall not exceed 2 per cent in any direction.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.18
When the TLOF is collocated with a helicopter stand and
intended to be used by ground taxiing helicopters only, the
TLOF shall at least be static load-bearing and be capable of
withstanding the traffic of the helicopters the area is intended
to serve.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.2.19
When the TLOF is collocated with a helicopter stand and
intended to be used by air taxiing helicopters, the TLOF shall
have a dynamic load-bearing area.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.2.1.
3.2.20
Safety area
The FATO shall be surrounded by a safety area which need
not be solid.
10/1/2014 Page 46 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.15. Performance class, and
items a) and b) are not
specified.3.2.21
A safety area surrounding a FATO intended to be used by
helicopters operated in performance class 1 in visual
meteorological conditions (VMC) shall extend outwards from
the periphery of the FATO for a distance of at least 3 m or 0.25
D, whichever is greater, of the largest helicopter the FATO is
intended to serve and:
a) each external side of the safety area shall be at least 2
D where the FATO is quadrilateral; or
b) the outer diameter of the safety area shall be at least
2 D where the FATO is circular.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.5. Performance class and and
items a) and b) are nor
specified.3.2.22
A safety area surrounding a FATO intended to be used by
helicopters operated in performance class 2 or 3 in visual
meteorological conditions (VMC) shall extend outwards from
the periphery of the FATO for a distance of at least 3 m or 0.5
D, whichever is the greater, of the largest helicopter the FATO
is intended to serve and:
a) each external side of the safety area shall be at least 2
D where the FATO is quadrilateral; or
b) the outer diameter of the safety area shall be at least
2 D where the FATO is circular.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.23
There shall be a protected side slope rising at 45 degrees from
the edge of the safety area to a distance of 10 m, whose
surface shall not be penetrated by obstacles, except that when
obstacles are located to one side of the FATO only, they may
be permitted to penetrate the side slope surface.
10/1/2014 Page 47 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.2.1.
3.2.24
No fixed object shall be permitted on a safety area, except for
frangible objects, which, because of their function, must be
located on the area. No mobile object shall be permitted on a
safety area during helicopter operations.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.2.1.
3.2.25
Objects whose function require them to be located on the
safety area shall not exceed a height of 25 cm when located
along the edge of the FATO nor penetrate a plane originating
at a height of 25 cm above the edge of the FATO and sloping
upwards and outwards from the edge of the FATO at a
gradient of 5 per cent.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.26
Recommendation.— In the case of a FATO of diameter less
than 1 D, the maximum height of the objects whose functions
require them to be located on the safety area should not
exceed a height of 5 cm.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.2.1.
3.2.27
The surface of the safety area, when solid, shall not exceed an
upward slope of 4 per cent outwards from the edge of the
FATO.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.28
Where applicable, the surface of the safety area shall be
prepared in a manner to prevent flying debris caused by rotor
downwash.
10/1/2014 Page 48 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.29
The surface of the safety area abutting the FATO shall be
continuous with the FATO.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.2.30
Helicopter ground taxiways and ground taxi-routes
Note.— The following specifications are intended for the
safety of simultaneous operations during the manoeuvring of
helicopters. However, the wind velocity induced by the rotor
downwash might have to be considered.
The width of a helicopter ground taxiway shall not be less
then 2 times the largest width of the undercarriage (UCW) of
the helicopters the ground taxiway is intended to serve.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.2.31
The longitudinal slope of a helicopter ground taxiway shall
not exceed 3 per cent.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.2.32
A helicopter ground taxiway shall be static load-bearing and
be capable of withstanding the traffic of the helicopters the
helicopter ground taxiway is intended to serve.
10/1/2014 Page 49 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.2.33
A helicopter ground taxiway shall be centred on a ground
taxi-route.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.2.34
A helicopter ground taxi-route shall extend symmetrically on
each side of the centre line to a distance not less than the
largest overall width of the helicopters it is intended to serve.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.2.35
No objects shall be permitted on a helicopter ground
taxi-route, except for frangible objects, which, because of their
function, must be located there.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.2.36
The helicopter ground taxiway and the ground taxi-route shall
provide rapid drainage but the helicopter ground taxiway
transverse slope shall not exceed 2 per cent.
Not ApplicableChapter 3
Reference
Standard
3.2.37
The surface of a helicopter ground taxi-route shall be resistant
to the effect of rotor downwash.
10/1/2014 Page 50 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.22. Two times the overall width
of the helicopters that the
air taxiway is intended to
serve.
3.2.38
Helicopter air taxiways and air taxi-routes
Note.— A helicopter air taxiway is intended to permit
the movement of a helicopter above the surface at a height
normally associated with ground effect and at ground speed
less than 37 km/h (20 kt).
The width of a helicopter air taxiway shall be at least three
times the largest width of the undercarriage (UCW) of the
helicopters the air taxiway is intended to serve.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.39
The surface of a helicopter air taxiway shall be dynamic
load-bearing.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.40
The transverse slope of the surface of a helicopter air taxiway
shall not exceed 2 per cent and the longitudinal slope shall not
exceed 7 per cent. In any event, the slopes shall not exceed
the slope landing limitations of the helicopters the air taxiway
is intended to serve.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.41
A helicopter air taxiway shall be centred on an air taxi-route.
10/1/2014 Page 51 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.42
A helicopter air taxi-route shall extend symmetrically on each
side of the centre line to a distance not less than the largest
overall width of the helicopters it is intended to serve.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.43
No objects shall be permitted on an air taxi-route, except for
frangible objects, which, because of their function, must be
located thereon.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.23.
3.2.44
The surface of an air taxi-route shall be resistant to the effect
of rotor downwash.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.23.
3.2.45
The surface of an air taxi-route shall provide ground effect.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Aprons are not specifically
provided for.3.2.46
Aprons
The slope in any direction on a helicopter stand shall not
exceed 2 per cent.
10/1/2014 Page 52 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.1.19. Helicopter parking should
be adequate to
accommodate the number of
helicopters to be served. A
design which requires a
helicopter to be parked in a
minimum sized FATO or on
a TALO makes that area
unavailable for take-offs
and landings by other
helicopters.
3.2.47
A helicopter stand shall be of sufficient size to contain a circle
of diameter of at least 1.2 D of the largest helicopters the
stand is intended to serve.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.48
If a helicopter stand is used for taxi-through, the minimum
width of the stand and associated protection area shall be that
of the taxi-route.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.49
When a helicopter stand is used for turning, the minimum
dimension of the stand and protection area shall be not less
than 2 D.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.50
When a helicopter stand is used for turning, it shall be
surrounded by a protection area which extends for a distance
of 0.4 D from the edge of the helicopter stand.
10/1/2014 Page 53 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.51
For simultaneous operations, the protection area of helicopter
stands and their associated taxi-routes shall not overlap.
Note.— Where non-simultaneous operations are
envisaged, the protection area of helicopter stands and their
associated taxi-routes may overlap.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.52
When intended to be used for ground taxi operations by
wheeled helicopters, the dimensions of a helicopter stand
shall take into account the minimum turn radius of the
wheeled helicopters the stand is intended to serve.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.53
A helicopter stand and associated protection area intended to
be used for air taxiing shall provide ground effect.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.54
No fixed objects shall be permitted on a helicopter stand and
the associated protection area.
10/1/2014 Page 54 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.55
The central zone of the helicopter stand shall be capable of
withstanding the traffic of the helicopters it is intended to
serve and have a load-bearing area:
a) of diameter not less than 0.83 D of the largest
helicopter it is intended to serve; or
b) for a helicopter stand intended to be used for ground
taxi-through, the same width as the ground taxiway.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.56
The central zone of a helicopter stand intended to be used for
ground taxiing only shall be static load-bearing.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.2.57
The central zone of a helicopter stand intended to be used for
air taxiing shall be dynamic load-bearing.
Note.— For a helicopter stand intended to be used for
turning on the ground, the dimension of the central zone
might have to be increased.
10/1/2014 Page 55 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.3.1
3.3 Helidecks
Note.— The following specifications are for helidecks
located on structures engaged in such activities as mineral
exploitation, research or construction. See 3.4 for shipboard
heliport provisions.
Final approach and take-off areas and touchdown and
lift-off areas
N1.For helidecks that have a 1D or larger FATO it is
presumed that the FATO and the TLOF will always occupy
the same space and have the same load bearing
characteristics so as to be coincidental. For helidecks that
are less than 1D, the reduction in size is only applied to the
TLOF which is a load bearing area. In this case, the FATO
remains at 1D but the portion extending beyond the TLOF
perimeter need not be load bearing for helicopters. The
TLOF and the FATO may be assumed to be collocated.
N2.Guidance on the effects of airflow direction and
turbulence, prevailing wind velocity and high temperatures
from gas turbine exhausts or flare radiated heat on the
location of the FATO is given in the Heliport Manual (Doc
9261).
The specifications in 3.3.14 and 3.3.15 shall be applicable for
helidecks completed on or after 1 January 2012.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.3.1.
3.3.2
A helideck shall be provided with one FATO and one
coincident or collocated TLOF.
10/1/2014 Page 56 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.3.2.
3.3.3
A FATO may be any shape but shall be of sufficient size to
contain an area within which can be accommodated a circle of
diameter of not less than 1 D of the largest helicopter the
helideck is intended to serve.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.3.2. Weight breaks are not
specified. 1.0 D applies
equally.3.3.4
A TLOF may be any shape but shall be of sufficient size to
contain:
a) for helicopters with an MTOM of more than 3 175 kg,
an area within which can be accommodated a circle
of diameter not less than 1 D of the largest helicopter
the helideck is intended to serve; and
b) for helicopters with an MTOM of 3 175 kg or less, an
area within which can be accommodated a circle of
diameter not less than 0.83 D of the largest helicopter
the helideck is intended to serve.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
Note: weight break not
specified.
AC139-8, 3.3.2.
3.3.5
Recommendation.— For helicopters with an MTOM of 3 175
kg or less, the TLOF should be of sufficient size to contain an
area within which can be accommodated a circle of diameter
of not less than 1 D of the largest helicopter the helideck is
intended to serve.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.3.6
A helideck shall be arranged to ensure that a sufficient and
unobstructed air-gap is provided which encompasses the full
dimensions of the FATO.
Note.— Specific guidance on the characteristics of an
air-gap is given in the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261). As a
general rule, except for shallow superstructures of three
stories or less, a sufficient air-gap will be at least 3m.
10/1/2014 Page 57 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.3.7
Recommendation.— The FATO should be located so as to
avoid, as far as is practicable, the influence of environmental
effects, including turbulence, over the FATO, which could
have an adverse impact on helicopter operations.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.3.8
The TLOF shall be dynamic load-bearing.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.3.9
The TLOF shall provide ground effect.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.3.4.
3.3.10
No fixed object shall be permitted around the edge of the
TLOF, except for frangible objects, which, because of their
function, must be located thereon.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.3.5. No provision for diameter
less than 1 D.3.3.11
For any TLOF designed for use by helicopters having a
D-value of greater than 16.0 m, objects in the obstacle-free
sector whose function requires them to be located on the
edge of the TLOF shall not exceed a height of 25 cm.
10/1/2014 Page 58 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.3.12
For any TLOF designed for use by helicopters having a
D-value of 16.0 m or less, objects in the obstacle-free sector
whose function requires them to be located on the edge of the
TLOF, shall not exceed a height of 5 cm.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.3.13
For any TLOF having dimensions of less than 1 D, the
maximum height of such objects in the obstacle-free sector
whose function requires them to be located on the edge of the
TLOF shall not exceed a height of 5 cm.
Note.— Lighting that is mounted at a height of less than
25 cm is typically assessed for adequacy of visual cues before
and after installation.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.3.5. The 2.5 cm height is not
specified.3.3.14
Objects whose function requires them to be located within the
TLOF (such as lighting or nets) shall not exceed a height of
2.5 cm. Such objects shall only be present if they do not
represent a hazard to helicopters.
Note.— Examples of potential hazards include nets or
raised fittings on the deck that might induce dynamic
rollover for helicopters equipped with skids.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.2.9.
3.3.15
Safety devices such as safety nets or safety shelves shall be
located around the edge of a helideck but shall not exceed the
height of the TLOF.
10/1/2014 Page 59 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.2.10.
3.3.16
The surface of the TLOF shall be skid-resistant to both
helicopters and persons and be sloped to prevent pooling of
water.
Note.— Guidance on rendering the surface of the TLOF
skid-resistant is contained in the Heliport Mnaual (Doc
9261).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.4.1
3.4 Shipboard heliports
The specifications in 3.4.16 and 3.4.17 shall be applicable to
shipboard heliports completed on or after 1 January 2012 and
1 January 2015, respectively.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.4.1.
3.4.2
When helicopter operating areas are provided in the bow or
stern of a ship or are purpose-built above the ship’s structure,
they shall be regarded as purpose-built shipboard heliports.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.4.2.
3.4.3
Final approach and take-off areas and touchdown and
lift-off areas
Note.— Except for the arrangement described in 3.4.8
b), for shipboard heliports it is presumed that the FATO and
the TLOF will be coincidental. Guidance on the effects of
airflow direction and turbulence, prevailing wind velocity
and high temperature from gas turbine exhausts or flare
radiated heat on the location of the FATO is given in the
Heliport Manual (Doc 9261).
A shipboard heliport shall be provided with one FATO and
one coincidental or collocated TLOF.
10/1/2014 Page 60 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
More Exacting
or Exceeds
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.4.3. Circular, rather than any
shape.3.4.4
A FATO may be any shape but shall be of sufficient size to
contain an area within which can be accommodated a circle of
diameter of not less than 1 D of the largest helicopter the
helideck is intended to serve.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.4.5
The TLOF of a shipboard heliport shall be dynamic
load-bearing.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.4.6
The TLOF of a shipboard heliport shall provide ground effect.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.4.3.
3.4.7
For purpose-built shipboard heliports provided in a location
other than the bow or stern, the TLOF shall be of sufficient
size to contain a circle with a diameter not less than 1 D of the
largest helicopter the heliport is intended to serve.
10/1/2014 Page 61 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.4.3. Item b) is not specified.
3.4.8
For purpose-built shipboard heliports provided in the bow or
stern of a ship, the TLOF shall be sufficient size to:
a) contain a circle with a diameter not less than 1 D of
the largest helicopter the heliport is intended to
serve; or
b) for operations with limited touchdown directions,
contain an area within which can be accommodated
two opposing arcs of a circle with a diameter not less
than 1 D in the helicopter's longitudinal direction.
The minimum width of the heliport shall be not less
than 0.83 D (see Figure 3-7).
N1.The ship will need to be manoeuvred to ensure that
the relative wind is appropriate to the direction of the
helicopter touchdown heading.
N2.The touchdown heading of the helicopter is limited
to the angular distance subtended by the 1 D arc headings,
minus the angular distance which corresponds to 15 degrees
at each end of the arc.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.4.3.
3.4.9
For non-purpose-built shipboard heliports, the TLOF shall be
of sufficient size to contain a circle with a diameter not less
than 1 D of the largest helicopter the heliport is intended to
serve.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.4.10
A shipboard heliport shall be arranged to ensure that a
sufficient and unobstructed air-gap is provided which
encompasses the full dimensions of the FATO.
Note.— Specific guidance on the characteristics of an
air-gap is given in the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261). As a
general rule, except for shallow superstructures of three
stories or less, a sufficient air-gap will be at least 3 m.
10/1/2014 Page 62 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.4.11
Recommendation.— The FATO should be located so as to
avoid, as far as is practicable, the influence of environmental
effects, including turbulence, over the FATO, which could
have an adverse impact on helicopter operations.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.4.3.
3.4.12
No fixed object shall be permitted around the edge of the
TLOF except for frangible objects, which, because of their
function, must be located thereon.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.3.5.
3.4.13
For any TLOF designed for use by helicopters having a
D-value of greater than 16.0 m, objects in the obstacle-free
sector whose function requires them to be located on the
edge of the TLOF shall not exceed a height of 25 cm.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.4.14
For any TLOF designed for use by helicopters having a
D-value of 16.0 m or less, objects in the obstacle-free sector,
whose function requires them to be located on the edge of the
TLOF, shall not exceed a height of 5 cm.
10/1/2014 Page 63 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.4.15
For any TLOF having dimensions of less than 1 D, the
maximum height of such objects in the obstacle-free sector
whose function requires them to be located on the edge of the
TLOF shall not exceed a height of 5 cm.
Note.— Lighting that is mounted at a height of less than
25 cm is typically assessed for adequacy of visual cues before
and after installation.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.3.5. The 2.5 cm height is not
specified.3.4.16
Objects whose function requires them to be located within the
TLOF (such as lighting or nets) shall not exceed a height of
2.5 cm. Such objects shall only be present if they do not
represent a hazard to helicopters.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 3. Not specified.
3.4.17
Safety devices such as safety nets or safety shelves shall be
located around the edge of a shipboard heliport, except where
structural protection exists, but shall not exceed the height of
the TLOF.
No DifferenceChapter 3
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.4.4.
3.4.18
The surface of the TLOF shall be skid-resistant to both
helicopters and persons.
10/1/2014 Page 64 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not described in these
terms.4.1.1
CHAPTER 4. OBSTACLE
ENVIRONMENTNote.— The objectives of the specifications in this
chapter are to describe the airspace around heliports so as
to permit intended helicopter operations to be conducted
safely and to prevent, where appropriate State controls exist,
heliports from becoming unusable by the growth of obstacles
around them. This is achieved by establishing a series of
obstacle limitation surfaces that define the limits to which
objects may project into the airspace.
4.1 Obstacle limitation surfaces and sectors
Approach surface
Description. An inclined plane or a combination of planes or,
when a turn is involved, a complex surface sloping upwards
from the end of the safety area and centred on a line passing
through the centre of the FATO.
Note — See Figure 4-1, 4-2, 4-3 and 4-4 for depiction of
surfaces, See Table 4-1 for dimensions and slopes of surfaces.
10/1/2014 Page 65 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1.2.
4.1.2
Characteristics. The limits of an approach surface shall
comprise:
a) an inner edge horizontal and equal in length to the
minimum specified width/diameter of the FATO plus
the safety area, perpendicular to the centre line of the
approach surface and located at the outer edge of
the safety area;
b) two side edges originating at the ends of the inner
edge diverging uniformly at a specified rate from the
vertical plane containing the centre line of the
FATO; and
c) an outer edge horizontal and perpendicular to the
centre line of the approach surface and at a specified
height of 152 m (500 ft) above the elevation of the
FATO.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.1.3
The elevation of the inner edge shall be the elevation of the
FATO at the point on the inner edge that is intersected by the
centre line of the approach surface. For heliports intended to
be used by helicopters operated in performance class 1 and
when approved by an appropriate authority, the origin of the
inclined plane may be raised directly above the FATO.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.1.4
The slope(s) of the approach surface shall be measured in the
vertical plane containing the centre line of the surface.
10/1/2014 Page 66 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.1.5
In the case of an approach surface involving a turn, the
surface shall be a complex surface containing the horizontal
normals to its centre line and the slope of the centre line shall
be the same as that for a straight approach surface.
Note. — See Figure 4-5.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.1.6
In the case of an approach surface involving a turn, the
surface shall not contain more than one curved portion.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.1.7
Where a curved portion of an approach surface is provided,
the sum of the radius of arc defining the centre line of the
approach surface and the length of the straight portion
originating at the inner edge shall not be less than 575 m.
No DifferenceChapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1.2(g)(iii).
4.1.8
Any variation in the direction of the centre line of an
approach surface shall be designed so as not to necessitate a
turn radius less than 270 m.
Note.— For heliports intended to be used by helicopters
operated in performance class 2 and 3, it is good practice for
the approach paths to be selected so as to permit safe forced
landing or one-engine-inoperative landings such that, as a
minimum requirement, injury to persons on the ground or
water or damage to property are minimized. The most
critical helicopter type for which the heliport is intended
and the ambient conditions may be factors in determining
the suitability of such areas.
10/1/2014 Page 67 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.1.9
Transitional surface
Note.— For a FATO at a heliport without a PinS
approach incorporating a visual segment surface (VSS)
there is no requirement to provide transitional surfaces.
Description. A complex surface along the side of the safety
area and part of the side of the approach/take-off climb
surface, that slopes upwards and outwards to a predetermined
height of 45 m (150 ft).
Note.— See Figure 4-3. See Table 4-1 for dimensions
and slopes of surfaces.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.1.10
Characteristics. The limits of a transitional surface shall
comprise:
a) a lower edge beginning at a point on the side of the
approach/take-off climb surface at a specified height
above the lower edge extending down the side of the
approach/take-off climb surface to the inner edge of
the approach/take-off climb surface and from there
along the length of the side of the safety area parallel
to the centre line of the FATO; and
b) an upper edge located at a specified height above
the lower edge as set out in Table 4-1.
10/1/2014 Page 68 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.1.11
The elevation of a point on the lower edge shall be:
a) along the side of the approach/take-off climb surface
— equal to the elevation of the approach/take-off
climb surface at that point; and
b) along the safety area — equal to the elevation of the
inner edge of the approach/take-off climb surface.
N1.if the origin of the inclined plane of the
approach/take-off climb surface is raised as approved by an
appropriate authority, the elevation of the origin of the
transitional surface will be raised accordingly.
N2.As a result of b) the transitional surface along the
safety area will be curved if the profile of the FATO is curved,
or a plane if the profile is a straight line.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.1.12
The slope of the transitional surface shall be measured in a
vertical plane at right angles to the centre line of the FATO.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specifically defined.
4.1.13
Take-off climb surface
Description. An inclined plane, a combination of planes or,
when a turn is involved, a complex surface sloping upwards
from the end of the safety area and centred on a line passing
through the centre of the FATO.
Note.— See Figure 4-1, 4-2, 4-3 and 4-4 for depiction of
surfaces. See Table 4-1 for dimensions and slopes of surfaces.
10/1/2014 Page 69 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1.2. The centre line
perpendicular requirement
in a) is not specified.4.1.14
Characteristics. The limits of a take-off climb surface shall
comprise:
a) an inner edge horizontal and equal in length to the
minimum specified width/diameter of the FATO plus
the safety area, perpendicular to the centre line of the
take-off climb surface and located at the outer edge
of the safety area;
b) two side edges originating at the ends of the inner
edge and diverging uniformly at a specified rate from
the vertical plane containing the centre line of the
FATO; and
c) an outer edge horizontal and perpendicular to the
centre line of the take-off climb surface and at a
specified height of 152 m (500 ft) above the elevation
of the FATO.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.1.15
The elevation of the inner edge shall be the elevation of the
FATO at the point on the inner edge that is intersected by the
centre line of the take-off climb surface. For heliports intended
to be used by helicopters operated in performance class 1 and
when approved by an appropriate authority, the origin of the
inclined plane may be raised directly above the FATO.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.1.16
Where a clearway is provided the elevation of the inner edge
of the take-off climb surface shall be located at the outer edge
of the clearway at the highest point on the ground based on
the centre line of the clearway.
10/1/2014 Page 70 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.1.17
In the case of a straight take-off climb surface, the slope shall
be measured in the vertical plane containing the centre line of
the surface.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1.2. Only the 30 m requirement
is specified (in feet).4.1.18
In the case of a take-off climb surface involving a turn, the
surface shall be a complex surface containing the horizontal
normals to its centre line, and the slope of the centre line shall
be the same as that for a straight take-off climb surface.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.1.19
In the case of a take-off climb surface involving a turn, the
surface shall not contain more than one curved portion.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.1.20
Where a curved portion of a take-off climb surface is provided
the sum of the radius of arc defining the centre line of the
take-off climb surface and the length of the straight portion
originating at the inner edge shall not be less than 575 m.
10/1/2014 Page 71 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1.2.
4.1.21
Any variation in the direction of the centre line of a take-off
climb surface shall be designed so as not to necessitate a turn
of radius less than 270 m.
N1.Helicopter take-off performance is reduced in a curve
and as such a straight portion along the take-off climb
surface prior to the start of the curve allows for acceleration.
N2.For heliports intended to be used by helicopters
operated in performance class 2 and 3, it is good practice for
the departure paths to be selected so as to permit safe forced
landings or one-engine-inoperative landings such that, as a
minimum requirement, injury to persons on the ground or
water or damage to property are minimized. The most
critical helicopter type for which the heliport is intended
and the ambient conditions may be factors in determining
the suitability of such areas.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not defined.
4.1.22
Obstacle-free sector/surface — helidecks
Description. A complex surface originating at and extending
from, a reference point on the edge of the FATO of a helideck.
In the case of a TLOF of less than 1 D, the reference point
shall be located not less than 0.5 D from the centre of the
TLOF.
No DifferenceChapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8. 4.1.5.
4.1.23
Characteristics. An obstacle-free sector/surface shall
subtend an arc of specified angle.
10/1/2014 Page 72 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.1.24
A helideck obstacle-free sector shall comprise two
components, one above and one below helideck level:
Note.— See Figure 4-7.
a) Above helideck level: The surface shall be a
horizontal plane level with the elevation of the
helideck surface that subtends an arc of at least 210
degrees with the apex located on the periphery of the
D circle extending outwards to a distance that will
allow for an unobstructed departure path appropriate
to the helicopter the helideck is intended to serve.
b) Below helideck level: Within the (minimum) 210
-degree arc, the surface shall additionally extend
downward from the edge of the FATO below the
elevation of the helideck to water level for an arc of
not less than 180 degrees that passes through the
centre of the FATO and outwards to a distance that
will allow for safe clearance from the obstacles below
the helideck in the event of an engine failure for the
type of helicopter the helideck is intended to serve.
Note.— For both the above obstacle-free sectors for
helicopters operated in performance class 1 or 2, the
horizontal extent of these distances from the helideck will be
compatible with the one-engine-inoperative capability of the
helicopter type to be used.
10/1/2014 Page 73 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1.6. The limited obstacle sector
should extend outwards
from that part of the FATO
periphery that is not
contained within the
approach and take-off climb
sector, for a distance of not
less than one third the
overall helicopter length.
Within this sector no
obstruction should be
permitted above a 1:2
gradient.
4.1.25
Limited obstacle sector/surface — helidecks
Note.— Where obstacles are necessarily located on the
structure, a helideck may have a limited obstacle sector
(LOS).
Description. A complex surface originating at the reference
point for the obstacle-free sector and extending over the arc
not covered by the obstacle-free sector within which the
height of obstacles above the level of the TLOF will be
prescribed.
No DifferenceChapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1.5.
4.1.26
Characteristics. A limited obstacle sector shall not subtend
an arc greater than 150 degrees. Its dimensions and location
shall be as indicated in Figure 4-8 for a 1 D FATO with
coincidental TLOF and Figure 4-9 for a 0.83 D TLOF.
10/1/2014 Page 74 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Not ApplicableChapter 4
Reference
Standard
No precision-approach
FATO in New Zealand.4.2.1
4.2 Obstacle limitation requirements
N1.The requirements for obstacle limitation surfaces are
specified on the basis of the intended use of a FATO, i.e.
approach manoeuvre to hover or landing, or take-off
manoeuvre and type of approach, and are intended to be
applied when such use is made of the FATO. In cases where
operations are conducted to or from both directions of a
FATO, then the function of certain surfaces may be nullified
because of more stringent requirements of another lower
surface.
N2.If a visual approach slope indicator (VASI) is
installed, there are additional obstacle protection surfaces,
detailed in Chapter 5, that need to be considered and may
be more demanding than the obstacle limitation surfaces
prescribed in Table 4-1.
Surface-level heliports
The following obstacle limitation surfaces shall be established
for a FATO at heliports with a PinS approach procedure
utilizing a visual segment surface:
a) take-off climb surface;
b) approach surface; and
c) transitional surfaces.
N3.See Figure 4-3.
N4.The Procedures for Air Navigation Services —
Aircraft Operations, (PANS-OPS, Doc 8168), Volume II, Part
IV — Helicopters, details procedure design criteria.
No DifferenceChapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1.1.
4.2.2
The following obstacle limitation surfaces shall be established
for a FATO at heliports, other than specified in 4.2.1,
including heliports with a PinS approach procedure where a
visual segment surface is not provided:
a) take-off climb surface; and
b) approach surface.
10/1/2014 Page 75 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1.1. Not specified.
4.2.3
The slopes of the obstacle limitation surfaces shall not be
greater than, and their other dimensions not less than, those
specified in Table 4-1 and shall be located as shown in
Figures 4-1, 4-2 and 4-6.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.2.4
For heliports that have an approach/take-off climb surface
with a 4.5 per cent slope design, objects shall be permitted to
penetrate the obstacle limitation surface, if the results of an
aeronautical study approved by an appropriate authority have
reviewed the associated risks and mitigation measures.
N1.The identified objects may limit the heliport
operation.
N2.Annex 6, Part 3 provides procedures that may be
useful in determining the extent of obstacle penetration.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1. Not specified.
4.2.5
New objects or extensions of existing objects shall not be
permitted above any of the surfaces in 4.2.1 to 4.2.2 except
when shielded by an existing immovable object or after an
aeronautical study approved by an appropriate authority,
determines that the object will not adversely affect the safety
or significantly affect the regularity of operations of
helicopters.
Note.— Circumstances in which the shielding principle
may reasonably be applied are described in the Airport
Services Manual (Doc 9137), Part 6.
10/1/2014 Page 76 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 4.1. Not specified.
4.2.6
Recommendation.— Existing objects above any of the
surfaces in 4.2.1 to 4.2.2 should, as far as practicable, be
removed except when the object is shielded by an existing
immovable object, or after an aeronautical study approved
by an appropriate authority determines that the object will
not adversely affect the safety or significantly affect the
regularity of operations of helicopters.
Note.— The application of curved approach or take-off
climb surfaces as specified in 4.1.5 or 4.1.18 may alleviate
the problems created by objects infringing these surfaces.
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1.1. Reference specifies
sufficient approach and
take-off climb surfaces to
ensure that a helicopter can
conduct a landing or
take-off in the existing wind
conditions.
4.2.7
A surface-level heliport shall have at least one approach and
take-off climb surface. An aeronautical study shall be
undertaken by an appropriate authority when only a single
approach and take-off climb surface is provided considering
as a minimum, the following factors:
a) the area/terrain over which the flight is being
conducted;
b) the obstacle environment surrounding the heliport;
c) the performance and operating limitations of
helicopters intending to use the heliport; and
d) the local meteorological conditions including the
prevailing winds.
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1.1. Reference specifies
sufficient approach and
take-off climb surfaces to
ensure that a helicopter can
conduct a landing or
take-off in the existing wind
conditions.
4.2.8
Recommendation.— A surface-level heliport should have at
least two approach and take-off climb surfaces to avoid
downwind conditions, minimize crossswind conditions and
permit for a balked landing.
Note.— See Heliport Manual (Doc 9261) for guidance.
10/1/2014 Page 77 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1.2. No differentiation is applied
for elevated heliports.4.2.9
Elevated heliports
The obstacle limitation surfaces for elevated heliports shall
conform to the requirements for surface-level heliports
specified in 4.2.1 to 4.2.6.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1.1. The reference provides for a
heliport to have sufficient
approach and take-off climb
surfaces to ensure that a
helicopter can conduct a
landing or take-off in the
existing wind conditions.
4.2.10
An elevated heliport shall have at least one approach and
take-off climb surface. An aeronautical study shall be
undertaken by an appropriate authority when only a single
approach and take-off climb surface is provided considering
as a minimum, the following factors:
a) the area/terrain over which the flight is being
conducted;
b) the obstacle environment surrounding the heliport;
c) the performance and operating limitations of
helicopters intending to use the heliport; and
d) the local meteorological conditions including the
prevailing winds.
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 4
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 4.1.1. Reference specifies
sufficient approach and
take-off climb surfaces to
ensure that a helicopter can
conduct a landing or
take-off in the existing wind
conditions.
4.2.11
Recommendation.— An elevated heliport should have at
least two approach and take-off climb surfaces to avoid
downwind conditions, minimize crosswind conditions and
permit for a balked landing.
Note.— See the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261) for
guidance.
No DifferenceChapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1.5.
4.2.12
Helidecks
A helideck shall have an obstacle-free sector.
Note.— A helideck may have a LOS (see 4.1.26).
10/1/2014 Page 78 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 4.1.5.
4.2.13
There shall be no fixed obstacles within the obstacle-free
sector above the obstacle-free surface.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.2.14
In the immediate vicinity of the helideck, obstacle protection
for helicopters shall be provided below the helideck level.
This protection shall extend over an arc of at least 180 degrees
with the origin at the centre of the FATO, with a descending
gradient having a ratio of one unit horizontally to five units
vertically from the edges of the FATO within the 180-degree
sector. This descending gradient may be reduced to a ratio of
one unit horizontally to three units vertically within the
180-degree sector for multi-engine helicopters operated in
performance class 1 or 2 (see Figure 4-7).
Note.— Where there is a requirement to position, at sea
surface level, one or more offshore support vessel(s) (e.g. a
Standby Vessel) essential to the operation of a fixed or
floating offshore facility, but located within the proximity of
the fixed or floating offshore facility, any offshore support
vessel(s) would need to be positioned so as not to
compromise the safety of helicopter operations during
take-off departure and/or approach to landing.
10/1/2014 Page 79 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Figure 4-2.
4.2.15
For a TLOF of 1 D and larger, within the 150-degree limited
obstacle surface/sector out to a distance of 0.12 D measured
from the point of origin of the limited obstacle sector, objects
shall not exceed a height of 25 cm above the TLOF. Beyond
that arc, out to an overall distance of a further 0.21 D
measured from the end of the first sector, the limited obstacle
surface rises at a rate of one unit vertically for each two units
horizontally originating at a height 0.05 D above the level of
the TLOF (see Figure 4-8).
Note.— Where the area enclosed by the TLOF perimeter
marking is a shape other than circular, the extent of the LOS
segments are represented as lines parallel to the perimeter of
the TLOF rather than arcs. Figure 4-8 has been constructed
on the assumption that an octagonal helideck arrangement
is provided. Further guidance for square (quadrilateral)
and circular FATO and TLOF arrangements is given in the
Heliport Manual (Doc 9261).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.2.16
For a TLOF less than 1 D within the 150-degree limited
obstacle surface/sector out to a distance of 0.62 D and
commencing from a distance 0.5 D, both measured from the
centre of the TLOF, objects shall not exceed a height of 5 cm
above the TLOF. Beyond that arc, out to an overall distance
of 0.83 D from the centre of the TLOF, the limited obstacle
surface rises at a rate of one unit vertically for each two units
horizontally originating at a height 0.05 D above the level of
the TLOF (see Figure 4-9).
Note.— Where the area enclosed by the TLOF perimeter
marking is a shape other than circular, the extent of the LOS
segments are represented as lines parallel to the perimeter of
the TLOF rather than arcs. Figure 4-9 has been constructed
on the assumption that an octagonal helideck arrangement
is provided. Further guidance for square (quadrilateral)
and circular FATO and TLOF arrangements is given in the
Heliport Manual (Doc 9261).
10/1/2014 Page 80 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.2.17
Shipboard heliports
The specifications in 4.2.20 and 4.2.22 shall be applicable for
shipboard heliports completed on or after 1 January 2012.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.2.18
Purpose-built heliports located forward or aft
When helicopter operating areas are provided in the bow or
stern of a ship they shall apply the obstacle criteria for
helidecks.
No DifferenceChapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Figure 4-2.
4.2.19
Amidships location – purpose-built and non-purpose-built
Forward and aft of a TLOF of 1 D and larger shall be two
symmetrically located sectors, each covering an arc of 150
degrees, with their apexes on the periphery of the TLOF.
Within the area enclosed by these two sectors, there shall be
no objects rising above the level of the TLOF, except those
aids essential for the safe operation of a helicopter and then
only up to a maximum height of 25 cm.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.3.5. The 2.5 cm height is not
specified.4.2.20
Objects whose function requires them to be located within the
TLOF (such as lighting or nets) shall not exceed a height of
2.5 cm. Such objects shall only be present if they do not
represent a hazard to helicopters.
Note.— Examples of potential hazards include nets or
raised fittings on the deck that might induce dynamic
rollover for helicopters equipped with skids.
10/1/2014 Page 81 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.2.21
To provide further protection from obstacles fore and aft of
the TLOF, rising surfaces with gradients of one unit vertically
to five units horizontally shall extend from the entire length of
the edges of the two 150-degree sectors. These surfaces shall
extend for a horizontal distance equal to at least 1 D of the
largest helicopter the TLOF is intended to serve and shall not
be penetrated by any obstacle (see Figure 4-10).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 3.3.5 Not specified.
4.2.22
Non-purpose-built heliports
Ship's side location
No objects shall be located within the TLOF except those aids
essential for the safe operation of a helicopter (such as nets or
lighting) and then only up to a maximum height of 2.5 cm.
Such objects shall be present only if they do not represent a
hazard to helicopters.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.2.23
From the fore and aft midpoints of the D circle in two
segments outside the circle, limited obstacle areas shall extend
to the ship’s rail to a fore and aft distance of 1.5 times the
fore-to-aft-dimension of the TLOF, located symmetrically
about the athwartships bisector of the D circle. Within these
areas there shall be no objects rising above a maximum height
of 25 cm above the level of the TLOF (see Figure 4-11). Such
objects shall only be present if they do not represent a hazard
to helicopters.
10/1/2014 Page 82 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.2.24
A limited obstacle sector horizontal surface shall be provided,
at least 0.25 D beyond the diameter of the D circle, which shall
surround the inboard sides of the TLOF to the fore and aft
mid-points of the D circle. The limited obstacle sector shall
continue to the ship's rail to a fore and aft distance of 2.0
times the fore-to-aft dimension of the TLOF, located
symmetrically about the athwartships bisector of the D circle.
Within this sector there shall be no objects rising above a
maximum height of 25cm above the level of the TLOF.
Note.— Any objects located within the areas described
in 4.2.23 and 4.2.24 that exceed the height of the TLOF are
notified to the helicopter operator using a ship's helicopter
landing area plan. For notification purposes it may be
necessary to consider immoveable objects beyond the limit of
the surface prescribed in 4.2.24 particularly if objects are
significantly higher than 25 cm and in close proximity to the
boundary of the LOS. See the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261) for
guidance.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.2.25
Winching areas
An area designated for winching on-board ships shall be
comprised of a circular clear zone of diameter 5 m and
extending from the perimeter of the clear zone, a concentric
manoeuvring zone of diameter 2 D (see Figure 4-12).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.2.26
The manoeuvring zone shall be comprised of two areas:
a) the inner manoeuvring zone extending from the
perimeter of the clear zone and of a circle of diameter
not less than 1.5 D; and
b) the outer manoeuvring zone extending from the
perimeter of the inner manoeuvring zone and of a
circle of diameter not less than 2 D.
10/1/2014 Page 83 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.2.27
Within the clear zone of a designated winching area, no
objects shall be located above the level of its surface.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.2.28
Objects located within the inner manoeuvring zone of a
designated winching area shall not exceed a height of 3 m.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 4
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 4. Not specified.
4.2.29
Objects located within the outer manoeuvring zone of a
designated winching area shall not exceed a height of 6 m.
Note.— See the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261) for
guidance.
10/1/2014 Page 84 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.1.1.
5.1.1.1
CHAPTER 5. VISUAL AIDS
N1.The procedures used by some helicopters require
that they utilise a FATO having characteristics similar in
shape to a runway for fixed wing aircraft. For the purpose of
this chapter a FATO having characteristics similar in shape
to a runway is considered as satisfying the concept for a
“runway-type FATO”. For such arrangements it is sometimes
necessary to provide specific markings to enable a pilot to
distinguish a runway-type FATO during an approach.
Appropriate markings are contained within sub-sections
entitled “Runway-type FATOs”. The requirements
applicable to all other types of FATOs are given within
sub-sections entitled “All FATOs except runway-type
FATOs”.
N2.It has been found that, on surfaces of light colour,
the conspicuity of white and yellow markings can be
improved by outlining them in black.
N3.Guidance is given in the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261)
on marking the maximum allowable mass (5.2.3), the
D-value (5.2.4) and, if required, the actual FATO
dimension(s) (5.2.5) on the heliport surface to avoid
confusion between markings where metric units are used and
markings where imperial units are used.
N4.For a non-purpose built heliport located on a ship's
side the surface colour of the main deck can vary from ship
to ship and therefore some discretion may need to be
exercised in the colour selection of heliport paint schemes;
the objective being to ensure that the markings are
conspicuous against the surface of the ship and the
operating background.
5.1 Indicators
5.1.1 Wind direction indicators
10/1/2014 Page 85 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Application
A heliport shall be equipped with at least one wind direction
indicator.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.1.1.2
Location
A wind direction indicator shall be located so as to indicate
the wind conditions over the FATO and TLOF and in such a
way as to be free from the effects of airflow disturbances
caused by nearby objects or rotor downwash. It shall be
visible from a helicopter in flight, in a hover or on the
movement area.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.1.1.3
Recommendation.— Where a TLOF and/or FATO may be
subject to a disturbed airflow, then additional wind
direction indicators located close to the area should be
provided to indicate the surface wind on the area.
Note.— Guidance on the location of wind direction
indicators is given in the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.1.1.4
Characteristics
A wind direction indicator shall be constructed so that it
gives a clear indication of the direction of the wind and a
general indication of the wind speed.
10/1/2014 Page 86 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.1.1.5
Recommendation.— An indicator should be a truncated
cone made of lightweight fabric and should have the
following minimum dimensions:
Surface-level heliports
Elevated heliports and
helidecks
Length 2.4 m 1.2 m
Diameter (larger end) 0.6 m 0.3 m
Diameter (smaller end) 0.3 m 0.15 m
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.1.1.6
Recommendation.— The colour of the wind direction
indicator should be so selected as to make it clearly visible
and understandable from a height of at least 200 m (650 ft)
above the heliport, having regard to background. Where
practicable, a single colour, preferably white or orange,
should be used. Where a combination of two colours is
required to give adequate conspicuity against changing
backgrounds, they should preferably be orange and white,
red and white, or black and white, and should be arranged
in five alternate bands the first and last band being the
darker colour.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.1.
5.1.1.7
A wind direction indicator at a heliport intended for use at
night shall be illuminated.
10/1/2014 Page 87 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.1.1
5.2 Markings and markers
Note.— See Annex 14, Volume I, 5.2.1.4, Note 1,
concerning improving conspicuity of markings.
5.2.1 Winching area marking
Application
Winching area markings shall be provided at a designated
winching area. (See Figure 4-12.)
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.1.2
Location
Winching area markings shall be located so that its centre(s)
coincides with the centre of the clear zone of the winching
area. (See Figure 4-12.)
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.1.3
Characteristics
Winching area markings shall comprise a winching area clear
zone marking and a winching area manoeuvring zone marking.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.1.4
A winching area clear zone marking shall consist of a solid
circle of diameter not less than 5 m and of a conspicuous
colour.
10/1/2014 Page 88 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.1.5
A winching area manoeuvring zone marking shall consist of a
broken circle line of 30 cm in width and of a diameter not less
than 2 D and be marked in a conspicuous colour. Within it
"WINCH ONLY" shall be marked to be easily visible to the
pilot.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.1.
5.2.2.1
5.2.2 Heliport identification marking
Application
Heliport identification markings shall be provided at a heliport.
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.2. A heliport identification
marking should be located
within the aiming point
marking, or within the
TALO if no aiming point
marking is provided.
5.2.2.2
Location
A heliport identification marking shall be located at or near the
centre of the FATO.
N1.If the touchdown/positioning marking is offset on a
helideck, the heliport identification marking is established
in the centre of the touchdown/positioning marking.
N2.On a FATO, which does not contain a TLOF and
which is marked with an aiming point marking (see 5.2.8),
except for a heliport at a hospital, the heliport identification
marking is established in the centre of the aiming point
marking as shown in Figure 5-1.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.2.3
On a FATO which contains a TLOF, a heliport identification
marking shall be located in the FATO so the position of it
coincides with the centre of the TLOF.
10/1/2014 Page 89 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.2.4
Location – Runway-type FATOs
A heliport identification marking shall be located in the FATO
and when used in conjunction with FATO designation
markings, shall be displayed at each end of the FATO as
shown in Figure 5-2.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.3.
5.2.2.5
Characteristics
A heliport identification marking, except for a heliport at a
hospital, shall consist of a letter H, white in colour. The
dimensions of the H marking shall be no less than those
shown in Figure 5-3 and where the marking is used for a
runway-type FATO, its dimensions shall be increased by a
factor of 3 as shown in Figure 5-2.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.4 & Figure
5-1(a).5.2.2.6
A heliport identification marking for a heliport at a hospital
shall consist of a letter H, red in colour, on a white cross made
of squares adjacent to each of the sides of a square
containing the H as shown in Figure 5-3.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.5. The helideck provision is
not specified.5.2.2.7
A heliport identification marking shall be oriented with the
cross arm of the H at right angles to the preferred final
approach direction. For a helideck the cross arm shall be on or
parallel to the bisector of the obstacle-free sector. For a
non-purpose built shipboard heliport located on a ship's side
the cross arm shall be parallel with the side of the ship.
10/1/2014 Page 90 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.2.5 note.
5.2.2.8
Recommendation.— On a helideck and shipboard heliport
the size of the heliport identification H marking should have
a height of 4 m with an overall width not exceeding 3 m and
a stroke width not exceeding 0.75 m.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.6.
5.2.3.1
5.2.3 Maximum allowable mass marking
Application
A maximum allowable mass marking shall be displayed at an
elevated heliport, a helideck and a shipboard heliport.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.2.6. Specified only for elevated
heliports and helidecks.5.2.3.2
Recommendation.— A maximum allowable mass marking
should be displayed at a surface-level heliport.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.2.7.
5.2.3.3
Location
Recommendation.— A maximum allowable mass marking
should be located within the TLOF or FATO and so
arranged as to be readable from the preferred final
approach direction.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.8.
5.2.3.4
Characteristics
A maximum allowable mass marking shall consist of a one-,
two-, or three-digit number.
10/1/2014 Page 91 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.8.
5.2.3.5
The maximum allowable mass shall be expressed in tonnes (1
000 kg) rounded down to the nearest 1 000 kg followed by a
letter "t". Where States use mass in pounds, the maximum
allowable mass marking shall indicate the allowable helicopter
mass in thousands of pounds rounded down to the nearest 1
000 lbs.
Note.— Where States express the maximum allowable
mass in pounds, it is not appropriate to suffix with the letter
“t” which is used only to indicate metric tonnes. Guidance
on markings where States use imperial units is given in the
Heliport Manual (Doc 9261).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.2.8. Not specified to this level of
detail.5.2.3.6
Recommendation.— The maximum allowable mass should be
expressed to the nearest 100 kg. The marking should be
presented to one decimal place and rounded to the nearest
100 kg followed by the letter “t”. Where States use mass in
pounds, the maximum allowable mass marking should
indicate the allowable helicopter mass in hundreds of
pounds rounded to the nearest 100 lb.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.3.7
Recommendation.— When the maximum allowable mass is
expressed to 100 kg, the decimal place should be preceded
with a decimal point marked with a 30 cm square.
10/1/2014 Page 92 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
Note: the limited-space
case is not provided for.
AC139-8, 5.2.9.
5.2.3.8
All FATOs except runway-type FATOs
Recommendation.— The numbers and the letter of the
marking should have a colour contrasting with the
background and should be in the form and proportion
shown in Figure 5-4 for a FATO with a dimension of more
than 30 m. For a FATO with a dimension of between 15 m to
30 m the height of the numbers and the letter of the marking
should be a minimum of 90 cm, and for a FATO with a
dimension of less than 15 m the height of the numbers and
the letter of the marking should be a minimum of 60 cm, each
with a proportional reduction in width and thickness.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.3.9
Runway-type FATOs
Recommendation.— The numbers and the letter of the
marking should have a colour contrasting with the
background and should be in the form and proportion
shown in Figure 5-4.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.4.1
5.2.4 D-value marking
Application
All FATOs except runway-type FATOs
The D-value marking shall be displayed at a helideck and at a
shipboard heliport.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.4.2
Runway-type FATOs
Note.— The D-value is not required to be marked on a
heliport with a runway-type FATO.
Recommendation.— The D-value marking should be
displayed at surface-level and elevated heliports designed
for helicopters operated in Performance Class 2 or 3.
10/1/2014 Page 93 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.4.3
Location
A D-value marking shall be located within the TLOF or FATO
and so arranged as to be readable from the preferred final
approach direction.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.4.4
Recommendation.— Where there is more than one approach
direction, additional D-value markings should be provided
such that at least one D-value marking is readable from the
final approach directions. For a non-purpose built heliport
located on a ship's side, D-value markings should be
provided on the perimeter of the D circle at the 2 o'clock, 10
o'clock and 12 o'clock positions when viewed from the side
of the ship facing towards the centre line.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.4.5
Characteristics
The D-value marking shall be white. The D-value marking
shall be rounded to the nearest whole metre or foot with 0.5
rounded down.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.4.6
Recommendation.— The numbers of the marking should
have a colour contrasting with the background and should
be in the form and proportion shown in Figure 5-4 for a
FATO with a dimension of more than 30 m. For a FATO with
a dimension of between 15 m to 30 m the height of the
numbers of the marking should be a minimum of 90 cm, and
for a FATO with a dimension of less than 15 m the height of
the numbers of the marking should be a minimum of 60 cm,
each with a proportional reduction in width and thickness.
10/1/2014 Page 94 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.5.1
5.2.5 Final approach and take-off area dimension(s) marking
Application
Recommendation.— The actual dimension(s) of the FATO
intended to be used by helicopters operated in performance
class 1 should be marked on the FATO.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.5.2
Recommendation.— If the actual dimension(s) of the FATO
to be used by helicopters operated in performance class 2 or
3 is less than 1 D, the dimension(s) should be marked on the
FATO.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.5.3
Location
A FATO dimension marking shall be located within the FATO
and so arranged as to be readable from the preferred final
approach direction.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.5.4
Characteristics
The dimension(s) shall be rounded to the nearest metre or
foot.
Note.— If the FATO is rectangular both the length and
width of the FATO relative to the preferred final approach
direction is indicated.
10/1/2014 Page 95 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.5.5
All FATOs except runway-type FATOs
Recommendation.— The numbers of the marking should
have a colour contrasting with the background and should
be in the form and proportion shown in Figure 5-4 fro a
FATO with a dimension of more than 30 m. For a FATO with
a dimension between 15 m to 30 m the height of the numbers
of the marking should be a minimum of 90 cm, and for a
FATO with a dimension of less than 15 m the height of the
numbers of the marking should be a minimum of 60 cm, each
with a proportional reduction in width and thickness.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.5.6
Runway-type FATOs
Recommendation.— The numbers of the marking should
have a colour contrasting with the background and should
be in the form and proportion shown in Figure 5-4.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.10.
5.2.6.1
5.2.6 Final approach and take-off area perimeter marking or
markers for surface-level heliports
Application
FATO perimeter marking or markers shall be provided at a
surface-level heliport where the extent of the FATO is not
self-evident.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.11.
5.2.6.2
Location
The FATO perimeter marking or markers shall be located on
the edge of the FATO.
10/1/2014 Page 96 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.12. The spacing is not
specified.5.2.6.3
Characteristics — Runway-type FATOs
The perimeter of the FATO shall be defined with markings or
markers spaced at equal intervals of not more than 50 m with
at least three markings or markers on each side including a
marking or marker at each corner.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.12. A continuous white line 600
mm wide is specified.5.2.6.4
A FATO perimeter marking shall be a rectangular stripe with a
length of 9 m or one-fifth of the side of the FATO which it
defines and a width of 1 m.
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.12. The reference also provides
for mowing, bare earth, or
marker boards where the
FATO is on grass.
5.2.6.5
FATO perimeter markings shall be white.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.6.6
A FATO perimeter marker shall have dimensional
characteristics as shown in Figure 5-5.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.6.7
FATO perimeter markers shall be of colour(s) that contrast
effectively against the operating background.
10/1/2014 Page 97 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.6.8
Recommendation.— FATO perimeter markers should be a
single colour, orange or red, or two contrasting colours,
orange and white or, alternatively, red and white should be
used except where such colours would merge with the
background.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.6.9
Characteristics — All FATOs except runway-type FATOs
For an unpaved FATO the perimeter shall be defined with
flush in-ground markers. The FATO perimeter markers shall be
30 cm in width, 1.5 m in length, and with end-to-end spacing
of not less than 1.5 m and not more than 2 m. The corners of a
square or rectangular FATO shall be defined.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.6.10
For a paved FATO the perimeter shall be defined with a
dashed line. The FATO perimeter marking segments shall be
30 cm in width, 1.5 m in length, and with end-to-end spacing
of not less than 1.5 m and not more than 2 m. The corners of
the square or rectangular FATO shall be defined.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.6.11
FATO perimeter markings and flush in-ground markers shall
be white.
10/1/2014 Page 98 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.2.12. Not specified.
5.2.7.1
5.2.7 Final approach and take-off area designation markings
for runway-type FATOs
Application
Recommendation.— A FATO designation marking should be
provided at a heliport where it is necessary to designate the
FATO to the pilot.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.12. Not specified.
5.2.7.2
Location
A FATO designation marking shall be located at the
beginning of the FATO as shown in Figure 5-2.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.12. Not specified.
5.2.7.3
Characteristics
A FATO designation marking shall consist of a two-digit
number. The two-digit number shall be the whole number
nearest the one-tenth of the magnetic North when viewed
from the direction of approach. When the above rule would
give a single digit number, it shall be preceded by a zero. The
marking as shown in Figure 5-2, shall be supplemented by the
heliport identification marking.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.2.13.
5.2.8.1
5.2.8 Aiming point marking
Application
Recommendation.— An aiming point marking should be
provided at a heliport where it is necessary for a pilot to
make an approach to a particular point above a FATO
before proceeding to a TLOF.
10/1/2014 Page 99 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.14.
5.2.8.2
Location — Runway-type FATOs
The aiming point marking shall be located within the FATO.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
Note: 5.2.14 specifies
"within the FATO".
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.8.3
Location — All FATOs except runway-type FATOs
The aiming point marking shall be located at the centre of the
FATO as shown in Figure 5-1.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.15.
5.2.8.4
Characteristics
The aiming point marking shall be an equilateral triangle with
the bisector of one of the angles aligned with the preferred
approach direction. The marking shall consist of continuous
white lines, and the dimensions of the marking shall conform
to those shown in Figure 5-6.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.16.
5.2.9.1
5.2.9 Touchdown and lift-off area perimeter marking
Application
A TLOF perimeter marking shall be displayed on a TLOF
located in a FATO at a surface-level heliport if the perimeter of
the TLOF is not self-evident.
10/1/2014 Page 100 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.16.
5.2.9.2
A TLOF perimeter marking shall be displayed on an elevated
heliport, a helideck and a shipboard heliport.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.9.3
Recommendation.— A TLOF perimeter marking should be
provided on each TLOF collocated with a helicopter stand
at a surface-level heliport.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.17.
5.2.9.4
Location
The TLOF perimeter marking shall be located along the edge
of the TLOF.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.18.
5.2.9.5
Characteristics
A TLOF perimeter marking shall consist of a continuous white
line with a width of at least 30cm.
10/1/2014 Page 101 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.19.
5.2.10.1
5.2.10 Touchdown/positioning marking
Application
A touchdown/positioning marking shall be provided where it
is necessary for a helicopter to touch down and/or be
accurately positioned by the pilot. A touchdown/positioning
marking shall be provided on a helicopter stand designed for
turning.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
Note: the safe margin is
specified as one half
rotor diameter.
AC139-8, 5.2.20.
5.2.10.2
Location
A touchdown/positioning marking shall be located so that
when the pilot's seat is over the marking, the whole of the
undercarriage will be within the TLOF and all parts of the
helicopter will be clear of any obstacle by a safe margin.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.10.3
On a heliport the centre of the touchdown/positioning
marking shall be located at the centre of the TLOF, except the
centre of the touchdown/positioning marking may be offset
away from the centre of the TLOF where an aeronautical
study indicates such offsetting to be necessary and providing
that a marking so offset would not adversely affect safety. For
a helicopter stand designed for hover turning, the
touchdown/positioning marking shall be located in the centre
of the central zone (see Figure 3-4).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.20. Not specified.
5.2.10.4
On a helideck the centre of the touchdown marking shall be
located at the centre of the FATO, except that the marking
may be offset away from the origin of the obstacle-free sector
by no more than 0.1 D where an aeronautical study indicates
such offsetting to be necessary and that a marking so offset
would not adversely affect the safety.
Note.— See Heliport Manual (Doc 9261) for guidance.
10/1/2014 Page 102 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.21.
5.2.10.5
Characteristics
A touchdown/positioning marking shall be a yellow circle and
have a line width of at least 0.5 m. For a helideck and a
purpose built shipboard heliport, the line width shall be at
least 1 m.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.21. Not specified.
5.2.10.6
The inner diameter of the touchdown/positioning marking
shall be 0.5 D of the largest helicopter the TLOF and/or the
helicopter stand is intended to serve.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.2.22.
5.2.11.1
5.2.11 Heliport name marking
Application
Recommendation.— A heliport name marking should be
provided at a heliport and helideck where there is
insufficient alternative means of visual identification.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.2.23.
5.2.11.2
Location
Recommendation.— The heliport name marking should be
displayed on the heliport so as to be visible, as far as
practicable, at all angles above the horizontal. Where an
obstacle sector exists on a helideck the marking should be
located on the obstacle side of the heliport identification
marking. For a non-purpose built heliport located on a
ship's side the marking should be located on the inboard
side of the heliport identification marking in the area
between the TLOF perimeter marking and the boundary of
the LOS.
10/1/2014 Page 103 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.24.
5.2.11.3
Characteristics
A heliport name marking shall consist of the name or the
alphanumeric designator of the heliport as used in the radio
(R/T) communications.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.2.24. Not specified.
5.2.11.4
Recommendation.— A heliport name marking intended for
use at night or during conditions of poor visibility should be
illuminated, either internally or externally.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.2.24.
5.2.11.5
Runway-type FATOs
Recommendation.— The characters of the marking should be
not less than 3 m in height.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.11.6
All FATOs except runway-type FATOs
Recommendation.— The characters of the marking should be
not less than 1.5 m in height at surface-level heliports and
not less than 1.2 m on elevated heliports, helidecks and
shipboard heliports. The colour of the marking should
contrast with the background and preferably be white.
10/1/2014 Page 104 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2. Not specified.
5.2.12.1
5.2.12 Helideck obstacle-free sector (chevron) marking
Application
A helideck with adjacent obstacles that penetrate above the
level of the helideck shall have an obstacle-free sector
marking.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2. Not specified.
5.2.12.2
Location
A helideck obstacle-free sector marking shall be located,
where practicable, at a distance from the centre of the TLOF
equal to the radius of the largest circle that can be drawn in
the TLOF or 0.5 D, whichever is greater.
Note.— Where the Point of Origin is outside the TLOF,
and it is not practicable to physically paint the chevron, the
chevron is relocated to the TLOF perimeter on the bisector of
the OFS. In this case the distance and direction of
displacement, along with the attention getting “WARNING
DISPLACED CHEVRON”, with the distance and direction of
displacement, is marked in a box beneath the chevron in
black characters not less than 10 cm high – an example
Figure is given in the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2. Not specified.
5.2.12.3
Characteristics
The helideck obstacle-free sector marking shall indicate the
location of the obstacle-free sector and the directions of the
limits of the sector.
Note.— Example figures are given in the Heliport
Manual (Doc 9261).
10/1/2014 Page 105 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2. Not specified.
5.2.12.4
The height of the chevron shall not be less than 30 cm.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2. Not specified.
5.2.12.5
The chevron shall be marked in a conspicuous colour.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.12.6
Recommendation.— The colour of the chevron should be
black.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.13.1
5.2.13 Helideck and shipboard heliport surface marking
Application
Recommendation.— A surface marking should be provided
to assist the pilot to identify the location of the helideck or
shipboard heliport during an approach by day.
10/1/2014 Page 106 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.13.2
Location
Recommendation.— A surface marking should be applied to
the dynamic load bearing area bounded by the TLOF
perimeter marking.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.2. Not specified.
5.2.13.3
Characteristics
Recommendation.— The helideck or shipboard heliport
surface bounded by the TLOF perimeter marking should be
of dark green using a high friction coating.
Note.— Where the application of a surface coating may
have a degrading effect on friction qualities the surface
might not be painted. In such cases the best operating
practice to enhance the conspicuity of markings is to outline
deck markings with a contrasting colour.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.2. Not specified.
5.2.14.1
Application
Recommendation.— Helideck prohibited landing sector
markings should be provided where it is necessary to
prevent the helicopter from landing within specified
headings.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2. Not specified.
5.2.14.2
Location
The prohibited landing sector markings shall be located on
the touchdown/positioning marking to the edge of the TLOF,
within the relevant headings.
10/1/2014 Page 107 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2. Not specified.
5.2.14.3
Characteristics
The prohibited landing sector markings shall be indicated by
white and red hatched markings as shown in Figure 5-7.
Note.— Prohibited landing sector markings, where
deemed necessary, are applied to indicate a range of
helicopter headings that are not to be used by a helicopter
when landing. This is to ensure that the nose of the
helicopter is kept clear of the hatched markings during the
manoeuvre to land.
Not ApplicableChapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
5.2.15.1
5.2.15 Helicopter ground taxiway markings and markers
N1.The specifications for taxi-holding position markings
in Annex 14, Volume I, 5.2.10 are equally applicable to
taxiways intended for ground taxiing of helicopters.
N2.Ground taxi-routes are not required to be marked.
Application
Recommendation.— The centre line of a helicopter ground
taxiway should be identified with a marking, and the edges
of a helicopter ground taxiway, if not self-evident, should be
identified with markers or markings.
Not ApplicableChapter 5
Reference
Standard
5.2.15.2
Location
Helicopter ground taxiway markings shall be along the centre
line and, if required, along the edges of a helicopter ground
taxiway.
10/1/2014 Page 108 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Not ApplicableChapter 5
Reference
Standard
5.2.15.3
Helicopter ground taxiway edge markers shall be located at a
distance of 0.5 m to 3 m beyond the edge of the helicopter
ground taxiway.
Not ApplicableChapter 5
Reference
Standard
5.2.15.4
Helicopter ground taxiway edge markers, where provided,
shall be spaced at intervals of not more than 15 m on each
side of straight sections and 7.5 m on each side of curved
sections with a minimum of four equally spaced markers per
section.
Not ApplicableChapter 5
Reference
Standard
5.2.15.5
Characteristics
A helicopter ground taxiway centre line marking shall be a
continuous yellow line 15 cm in width.
Not ApplicableChapter 5
Reference
Standard
5.2.15.6
Helicopter ground taxiway edge markings shall be a
continuous double yellow line, each 15 cm in width, and
spaced 15 cm apart (nearest edge to nearest edge).
Note.— Signage may be required on an aerodrome
where it is necessary to indicate that a helicopter ground
taxiway is suitable only for the use of helicopters.
Not ApplicableChapter 5
Reference
Standard
5.2.15.7
A helicopter ground taxiway edge marker shall be frangible.
10/1/2014 Page 109 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Not ApplicableChapter 5
Reference
Standard
5.2.15.8
A helicopter ground taxiway edge marker shall not exceed a
plane originating at a height of 25 cm above the plane of the
helicopter ground taxiway, at a distance of 0.5 m from the edge
of the helicopter ground taxiway and sloping upwards and
outwards at a gradient of 5 per cent to a distance of 3 m
beyond the edge of the helicopter ground taxiway.
Not ApplicableChapter 5
Reference
Standard
5.2.15.9
A helicopter ground taxiway edge marker shall be blue.
N1.Guidance on suitable edge markers is given in the
Heliport Manual (Doc 9261).
N2.If blue markers are used on an aerodrome, signage
may be required to indicate that the helicopter ground
taxiway is suitable only for helicopters.
Not ApplicableChapter 5
Reference
Standard
5.2.15.10
If the helicopter ground taxiway is to be used at night, the
edge markers shall be internally illuminated or retro-reflective.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.2.26.
5.2.16.1
5.2.16 Helicopter air taxiway markings and markers
Note.— Air taxi-routes are not required to be marked.
5.2.16 Air transit route markers
Application
Recommendation.— The centre line of a helicopter air
taxiway or, if not self evident, the edges of a helicopter air
taxiway should be identified with markers or markings.
10/1/2014 Page 110 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.27.
5.2.16.2
Location
A helicopter air taxiway centre line marking or flush-in-ground
centre line marker shall be located along the centre line of the
helicopter air taxiway.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.16.3
Helicopter air taxiway edge markings shall be located along
the edges of a helicopter air taxiway.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.16.4
Helicopter air taxiway edge markers shall be located at a
distance of 1 m to 3 m beyond the edge of the helicopter air
taxiway.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.16.5
Recommendation.— Helicopter air taxiway edge markers
should not be located at a distance of less than 0.5 times the
largest overall width of the helicopter for which it is
designed from the centre line of the helicopter air taxiway.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.16.6
Characteristics
A helicopter air taxiway centre line, when on a paved surface,
shall be marked with a continuous yellow line 15 cm in width.
10/1/2014 Page 111 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.16.7
The edges of a helicopter air taxiway, when on a paved
surface, shall be marked with continuous double yellow lines
each 15 cm in width, and spaced 15 cm apart (nearest edge to
nearest edge).
Note.— Where there is potential for a helicopter air
taxiway to be confused with a helicopter ground taxiway,
signage my be required to indicate the mode of taxi
operations that are permitted.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.16.8
A helicopter air taxiway centre line, when on an unpaved
surface that will not accommodate painted markings, shall be
marked with flush in-ground 15 cm wide and approximately 1.5
m in length yellow markers, spaced at intervals of not more
than 30 m on straight sections and not more than 15 m on
curves, with a minimum of four equally spaced markers per
section.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.27. Number of markers per
section not specified.5.2.16.9
Helicopter air taxiway edge markers, where provided, shall be
spaced at intervals of not more than 30 m on each side of
straight sections and not more than 15 m on each side of
curves, with a minimum of four equally spaced markers per
section.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2.28.
5.2.16.10
Helicopter air taxiway edge markers shall be frangible.
10/1/2014 Page 112 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.16.11
Helicopter air taxiway edge markers shall not penetrate a plane
originating at a height of 25 cm above the plane of the
helicopter air taxiway, at a distance of 1 m from the edge of the
helicopter air taxiway and sloping upwards and outwards at a
gradient of 5 per cent to a distance of 3 m beyond the edge of
the helicopter air taxiway.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.16.12
Recommendation.— Helicopter air taxiway edge markers
should not penetrate a plane originating at a height of 25
cm above the plane of the helicopter air taxiway, at a
distance of 0.5 times the largest overall width of the
helicopter for which it is designed from the centre line of the
helicopter air taxiway, and sloping upwards and outwards
at a gradient of 5 per cent.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.2. Not specified.
5.2.16.13
A helicopter air taxiway edge marker shall be of colour(s) that
contrast effectively against the operating background. The
colour red shall not be used for markers.
Note.— Guidance for suitable edge markers is given in
the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.16.14
If the helicopter air taxiway is to be used at night, helicopter
air taxiway edge markers shall be either internally illuminated
or retro-reflective.
10/1/2014 Page 113 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.17.1
5.2.17 Helicopter stand markings
Application
A helicopter stand perimeter marking shall be provided on a
helicopter stand designed for turning. If a helicopter stand
perimeter marking is not practicable, a central zone perimeter
marking shall be provided instead if the perimeter of the
central zone is not self-evident.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.17.2
For a helicopter stand intended to be used for taxi-through
and which does not allow the helicopter to turn, a stop line
shall be provided.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.17.3
Recommendation.— Alignment lines and lead-in/lead-out
lines should be provided on a helicopter stand.
N1.See Figure 5-8.
N2.Helicopter stand identification markings may be
provided where there is a need to identify individual stands.
N3.Additional markings relating to stand size may be
provided. See the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.17.4
Location
A helicopter stand perimeter marking on a helicopter stand
designed for turning or, a central zone perimeter marking, shall
be concentric with the central zone of the stand.
10/1/2014 Page 114 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.17.5
For a helicopter stand intended to be used for taxi-through
and which does not allow the helicopter to turn, a stop line
shall be located on the helicopter ground taxiway axis at right
angles to the centre line.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.17.6
Alignment lines and lead-in/lead-out lines shall be located as
shown in Figure 5-8.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.17.7
Characteristics
A helicopter stand perimeter marking shall be a yellow circle
and have a line width of 15 cm.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.17.8
A central zone perimeter marking shall be a yellow circle and
have a line width of 15 cm, except when the TLOF is
collocated with a helicopter stand, the characteristics of the
TLOF perimeter markings shall apply.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.17.9
For a helicopter stand intended to be used for taxi-through
and which does not allow the helicopter to turn, a yellow stop
line shall not be less than the width of the helicopter ground
taxiway and have a line thickness of 50 cm.
10/1/2014 Page 115 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.17.10
Alignment lines and lead-in/lead-out lines shall be continuous
yellow lines and have a width of 15 cm.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.17.11
Curved portions of alignment lines and lead-in/lead-out lines
shall have radii appropriate to the most demanding helicopter
type the helicopter stand is intended to serve.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.17.12
Stand identification markings shall be marked in a contrasting
colour so as to be easily readable.
N1.Where it is intended that helicopters proceed in one
direction only, arrows indicating the direction to be
followed may be added as part of the alignment lines.
N2.The characteristics of markings related to the stand
size and alignment and lead-in/lead-out lines are illustrated
in Figure 5-8.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.18.1
5.2.18 Flight path alignment guidance marking
Application
Recommendation.— Flight path alignment guidance
marking(s) should be provided at a heliport where it is
desirable and practicable to indicate available approach
and/or departure path direction(s).
Note.— The flight path alignment guidance marking
can be combined with a flight path alignment guidance
lighting system described in 5.3.4.
10/1/2014 Page 116 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.18.2
Location
The flight path alignment guidance marking shall be located in
a straight line along the direction of approach and/or
departure path on one or more of the TLOF, FATO, safety
area or any suitable surface in the immediate vicinity of the
FATO or safety area.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.18.3
Characteristics
A flight path alignment guidance marking shall consist of one
or more arrows marked on the TLOF, FATO and/or safety area
surface as shown in Figure 5-9. The stroke of the arrow(s)
shall be 50 cm in width and at least 3 m in length. When
combined with a flight path alignment guidance lighting
system it shall take the form shown in Figure 5-9 which
includes scheme for marking ‘heads of the arrows’ which are
constant regardless of stroke length.
Note.— In the case of a flight path limited to a single
approach direction or single departure direction, the arrow
marking may be unidirectional. In the case of a heliport with
only a single approach/departure path available, one
bidirectional arrow is marked.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.2.18.4
Recommendation.— The markings should be in a colour
which provides good contrast against the background
colour of the surface on which they are marked, preferably
white.
10/1/2014 Page 117 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Not ApplicableChapter 5
Reference
Note
Compliance data not
required for Notes.5.3.1
5.3 Lights
General
N1.See Annex 14, Volume I, 5.3.1, concerning
specifications on screening of non-aeronautical ground
lights, and design of elevated and inset lights.
N2.In the case of helidecks and heliports located near
navigable waters, consideration needs to be given to
ensuring that aeronautical ground lights do not cause
confusion to mariners.
N3.As helicopters will generally come very close to
extraneous light sources, it is particularly important to
ensure that, unless such lights are navigation lights
exhibited in accordance with international regulations, they
are screened or located so as to avoid direct and reflected
glare.
N4.Specifications in sections 5.3.4, 5.3.6, 5.3.7 and 5.3.8
are designed to provide effective lighting systems bases on
nigh conditions. Where lights are to be used in conditions
other than night (i.e. day or twilight) it may be necessary to
increase the intensity of the lighting to maintain effective
visual cues by use of a suitable brilliancy control. Guidance
is provided in the Aerodrome Design Manual (Doc 9157),
Part 4 — Visual Aids.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3.2. Item a) is not specified.
5.3.2.1
5.3.2 Heliport beacon
Application
Recommendation.— A heliport beacon should be provided
at a heliport where:
a) long-range visual guidance is considered necessary
and is not provided by other visual means; or
b) identification of the heliport is difficult due to
surrounding lights.
10/1/2014 Page 118 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.3.
5.3.2.2
Location
The heliport beacon shall be located on or adjacent to the
heliport preferably at an elevated position and so that it does
not dazzle a pilot at short range.
Note.— Where a heliport beacon is likely to dazzle
pilots at short range, it may be switched off during the final
stages of the approach and landing.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.4.
5.3.2.3
Characteristics
The heliport beacon shall emit repeated series of equispaced
short duration white flashes in the format in Figure 5-10.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.4.
5.3.2.4
The light from the beacon shall show at all angles of azimuth.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3.4.
5.3.2.5
Recommendation.— The effective light intensity distribution
of each flash should be as shown in Figure 5-11, Illustration
1.
Note.— Where brilliancy control is desired, settings of
10 per cent and 3 per cent have been found to be
satisfactory. In addition, shielding may be necessary to
ensure that pilots are not dazzled during the final stages of
the approach and landing.
10/1/2014 Page 119 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.3.1
5.3.3 Approach lighting system
Application
Recommendation.— An approach lighting system should be
provided at a heliport where it is desirable and practicable
to indicate a preferred approach direction.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.3.2
Location
The approach lighting system shall be located in a straight
line along the preferred direction of approach.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.3.3
Characteristics
Recommendation.— An approach lighting system should
consist of a row of three lights spaced uniformly at 30 m
intervals and of a crossbar 18 m in length at a distance of 90
m from the perimeter of the FATO as shown in Figure 5-12.
The lights forming the crossbar should be as nearly as
practicable in a horizontal straight line at right angles to,
and bisected by, the line of the centre line lights and spaced
at 4.5 m intervals. Where there is the need to make the final
approach course more conspicuous additional lights spaced
uniformly at 30 m intervals should be added beyond the
crossbar. The lights beyond the crossbar may be steady or
sequenced flashing, depending upon the environment.
Note.— Sequenced flashing lights may be useful where
identification of the approach lighting system is difficult due
to surrounding lights.
10/1/2014 Page 120 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.3.4
The steady lights shall be omnidirectional white lights.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.3.5
Sequenced flashing lights shall be omnidirectional white
lights.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.3.6
Recommendation.— The flashing lights should have a flash
frequency of one per second and their light distribution
should be as shown in Figure 5-11, Illustration 3. The flash
sequence should commence from the outermost light and
progress towards the crossbar.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.3.7
Recommendation.— A suitable brilliancy control should be
incorporated to allow for adjustment of light intensity to
meet the prevailing conditions.
Note.— The following intensity settings have been found
suitable:
a) steady lights — 100 per cent, 30 per cent and 10
per cent; and
b) flashing lights — 100 per cent, 10 per cent and 3
per cent.
10/1/2014 Page 121 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.3.4.1
5.3.4 Flight path alignment guidance lighting system
Application
Recommendation.— Flight path alignment guidance
lighting system(s) should be provided at a heliport where it
is desirable and practicable to indicate available approach
and/or departure path direction(s).
Note.— The flight path alignment guidance lighting can
be combined with a flight path alignment guidance
marking(s) described in 5.2.18.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.3.4.2
Location
The flight path alignment guidance lighting system shall be in
a straight line along the direction(s) of approach and/or
departure path on one or more of the TLOF, FATO, safety
area or any suitable surface in the immediate vicinity of the
FATO, TLOF or safety area.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.3.4.3
Recommendation.— If combined with a flight path alignment
guidance marking, as far as is practicable the lights should
be located inside the “arrow” markings.
10/1/2014 Page 122 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.3.4.4
Characteristics
Recommendation.— A flight path alignment guidance
lighting system should consist of a row of three or more
lights spaced uniformly a total minimum distance of 6 m.
Intervals between lights should not be less than 1.5 m and
should not exceed 3 m. Where space permits there should be
5 lights. (See Figure 5-9.)
Note.— The number of lights and spacing between these
lights may be adjusted to reflect the space available. If more
than one flight path alignment system is used to indicate
available approach and/or departure path direction(s), the
characteristics for each system are typically kept the same.
(See Figure 5-9.)
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.3.4.5
The lights shall be steady omnidirectional inset white lights.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.3.4.6
Recommendation.— The distribution of the lights should be
as indicated in Figure 5-11, Illustration 6.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Ch 5. Not specified.
5.3.4.7
Recommendation.— A suitable control should be
incorporated to allow for adjustment of light intensity to
meet the prevailing conditions and to balance the flight path
alignment guidance lighting system with other heliport
lights and general lighting that may be present around the
heliport.
10/1/2014 Page 123 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.1
5.3.5 Visual alignment guidance system
Application
Recommendation.— A visual alignment guidance system
should be provided to serve the approach to a heliport
where one or more of the following conditions exist
especially at night:
a) obstacle clearance, noise abatement or traffic
control procedures require a particular direction to
be flown;
b) the environment of the heliport provides few visual
surface cues; and
c) it is physically impracticable to install an approach
lighting system.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.2
Location
The visual alignment guidance system shall be located such
that a helicopter is guided along the prescribed track towards
the FATO.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.3
Recommendation.— The system should be located at the
downwind edge of the FATO and aligned along the preferred
approach direction.
10/1/2014 Page 124 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.4
The light units shall be frangible and mounted as low as
possible.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.5
Where the lights of the system need to be seen as discrete
sources, light units shall be located such that at the extremes
of system coverage the angle subtended between units as
seen by the pilot shall not be less than 3 minutes of arc.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.6
The angles subtended between light units of the system and
other units of comparable or greater intensities shall also be
not less than 3 minutes of arc.
Note.— Requirements of 5.3.4.5 and 5.3.4.6 can be met
for lights on a line normal to the line of sight if the light
units are separated by 1 m for every kilometre of viewing
range.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.7
Signal format
The signal format of the alignment guidance system shall
include a minimum of three discrete signal sectors providing
“offset to the right”, “on track” and “offset to the left”
signals.
10/1/2014 Page 125 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.8
The divergence of the “on track” sector of the system shall be
as shown in Figure 5-13.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.9
The signal format shall be such that there is no possibility of
confusion between the system and any associated visual
approach slope indicator or other visual aids.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.10
The system shall avoid the use of the same coding as any
associated visual approach slope indicator.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.11
The signal format shall be such that the system is unique and
conspicuous in all operational environments.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.12
The system shall not significantly increase the pilot workload.
10/1/2014 Page 126 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.13
Light distribution
The usable coverage of the visual alignment guidance system
shall be equal to or better than that of the visual approach
slope indicator system with which it is associated.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.14
A suitable intensity control shall be provided so as to allow
adjustment to meet the prevailing conditions and to avoid
dazzling the pilot during approach and landing.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.15
Approach track and azimuth setting
A visual alignment guidance system shall be capable of
adjustment in azimuth to within ± 5 minutes of arc of the
desired approach path.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.16
The angle of azimuth guidance system shall be such that
during an approach the pilot of a helicopter at the boundary
of the “on track” signal will clear all objects in the approach
area by a safe margin.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.17
The characteristics of the obstacle protection surface
specified in 5.3.5.23, Table 5-1 and Figure 5-14 shall equally
apply to the system.
10/1/2014 Page 127 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.18
Characteristics of the visual alignment guidance system
In the event of the failure of any component affecting the
signal format the system shall be automatically switched off.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.5.19
The light units shall be so designed that deposits of
condensation, ice, dirt, etc., on optically transmitting or
reflecting surfaces will interfere to the least possible extent
with the light signal and will not cause spurious or false
signals to be generated.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.1
5.3.6 Visual approach slope indicator
Application
Recommendation.— A visual approach slope indicator
should be provided to serve the approach to a heliport,
whether or not the heliport is served by other visual
approach aids or by non-visual aids, where one or more of
the following conditions exist especially at night:
a) obstacle clearance, noise abatement or traffic
control procedures require a particular slope to be
flown;
b) the environment of the heliport provides few visual
surface cues; and
c) the characteristics of the helicopter require a
stabilized approach.
10/1/2014 Page 128 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.2
The standard visual approach slope indicator systems for
helicopter operations shall consist of the following:
a) PAPI and APAPI systems conforming to the
specifications contained in Annex 14, Volume I,
5.3.5.23 to 5.3.5.40 inclusive, except that the angular
size of the on-slope sector of the systems shall be
increased to 45 minutes; or
b) helicopter approach path indicator (HAPI) system
conforming to the specifications in 5.3.5.6 to 5.3.5.21
inclusive.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.3
Location
A visual approach slope indicator shall be located such that a
helicopter is guided to the desired position within the FATO
and so as to avoid dazzling the pilot during final approach and
landing.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.4
Recommendation.— A visual approach slope indicator
should be located adjacent to the nominal aiming point and
aligned in azimuth with the preferred approach direction.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.5
The light unit(s) shall be frangible and mounted as low as
possible.
10/1/2014 Page 129 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.6
HAPI signal format
The signal format of the HAPI shall include four discrete
signal sectors, providing an “above slope”, an “on slope”, a
“slightly below” and a “below slope” signal.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.7
The signal format of the HAPI shall be as shown in Figure
5-15, Illustrations A and B.
Note.— Care is required in the design of the unit to
minimize spurious signals between the signal sectors and at
the azimuth coverage limits.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.8
The signal repetition rate of the flashing sector of the HAPI
shall be at least 2 Hz.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.9
Recommendation.— The on-to-off ratio of pulsing signals of
the HAPI should be 1 to 1 and the modulation depth should
be at least 80 per cent.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.10
The angular size of the “on-slope” sector of the HAPI shall be
45 minutes.
10/1/2014 Page 130 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.11
The angular size of the “slightly below” sector of the HAPI
shall be 15 minutes.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.12
Light distribution
Recommendation.— The light intensity distribution of the
HAPI in red and green colours should be as shown in Figure
5-11, Illustration 4.
Note.— A larger azimuth coverage can be obtained by
installing the HAPI system on a turntable.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.13
Colour transition of the HAPI in the vertical plane shall be
such as to appear to an observer at a distance of not less than
300 m to occur within a vertical angle of not more than three
minutes.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.14
The transmission factor of a red or green filter shall be not
less than 15 per cent at the maximum intensity setting.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.15
At full intensity the red light of the HAPI shall have a
Y-coordinate not exceeding 0.320, and the green light shall be
within the boundaries specified in Annex 14, Volume I,
Appendix 1, 2.1.3.
10/1/2014 Page 131 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.16
A suitable intensity control shall be provided so as to allow
adjustment to meet the prevailing conditions and to avoid
dazzling the pilot during approach and landing.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.17
Approach slope and elevation setting
A HAPI system shall be capable of adjustment in elevation at
any desired angle between 1 degree and 12 degrees above the
horizontal with an accuracy of ±5 minutes of arc.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.18
The angle of elevation setting of HAPI shall be such that
during an approach, the pilot of a helicopter observing the
upper boundary of the “below slope” signal will clear all
objects in the approach area by a safe margin.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.19
Characteristics of the light unit
The system shall be so designed that:
a) in the event the vertical misalignment of a unit
exceeds ±0.5 degrees (±30 minutes), the system will
switch off automatically; and
b) if the flashing mechanism fails, no light will be
emitted in the failed flashing sector(s).
10/1/2014 Page 132 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.20
The light unit of the HAPI shall be so designed that deposits
of condensation, ice, dirt, etc., on optically transmitting or
reflecting surfaces will interfere to the least possible extent
with the light signal and will not cause spurious or false
signals to be generated.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.21
Recommendation.— A HAPI system intended for installation
on a floating helideck should afford a stabilization of the
beam to an accuracy of ±1/4 degree within ±3-degree pitch
and roll movement of the heliport.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.22
Obstacle protection surface
Note.— The following specifications apply to PAPI,
APAPI and HAPI.
An obstacle protection surface shall be established when it is
intended to provide a visual approach slope indicator system.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.23
The characteristics of the obstacle protection surface, i.e.
origin, divergence, length and slope, shall correspond to
those specified in the relevant column of Table 5-1 and in
Figure 5-14.
10/1/2014 Page 133 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.24
New objects or extensions of existing objects shall not be
permitted above an obstacle protection surface except when,
in the opinion of the appropriate authority, the new object or
extension would be shielded by an existing immovable object.
Note.— Circumstances in which the shielding principle
may reasonably be applied are described in the Airport
Services Manual, Part 6, (Doc 9137).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.25
Existing objects above an obstacle protection surface shall be
removed except when, in the opinion of the appropriate
authority, the object is shielded by an existing immovable
object, or after aeronautical study it is determined that the
object would not adversely affect the safety of operations of
helicopters.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.6.26
Where an aeronautical study indicates that an existing object
extending above an obstacle protection surface could
adversely affect the safety of operations of helicopters, one or
more of the following measures shall be taken:
a) suitably raise the approach slope of the system;
b) reduce the azimuth spread of the system so that the
object is outside the confines of the beam;
c) displace the axis of the system and its associated
obstacle protection surface by no more than 5
degrees;
d) suitably displace the FATO; and
e) install a visual alignment guidance system specified
in 5.3.4.
Note.— Guidance on this issue is contained in
the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261).
10/1/2014 Page 134 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.5.
5.3.7.1
5.3.7 Final approach and take-off area lighting systems for
surface-level heliports
Application
Where a FATO is established at a surface-level heliport on
ground intended for use at night, FATO lights shall be
provided except that they may be omitted where the FATO
and the TLOF are nearly coincidental or the extent of the
FATO is self-evident.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
Note: anomaly in AC to
be resolved - the spacing
for the square or
rectangle is given as 5 m,
not 50.
AC139-8, 5.3.6.
5.3.7.2
Location
FATO lights shall be placed along the edges of the FATO.
The lights shall be uniformly spaced as follows:
a) for an area in the form of a square or rectangle, at
intervals of not more than 50 m with a minimum of
four lights on each side including a light at each
corner; and
b) for any other shaped area, including a circular area,
at intervals of not more than 5 m with a minimum of
ten lights.
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.7. The AC specifies alternate
yelow and blue lights, with
the corner lights yellow, for
positive identification.
5.3.7.3
Characteristics
FATO lights shall be fixed omnidirectional lights showing
white. Where the intensity of the lights is to be varied the
lights shall show variable white.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3, Figures
5-6(a) and 5-6(b).5.3.7.4
Recommendation.— The light distribution of FATO lights
should be as shown in Figure 5-11, Illustration 5.
10/1/2014 Page 135 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.7.5
Recommendation.— The lights should not exceed a height of
25 cm and should be inset when a light extending above the
surface would endanger helicopter operations. Where a
FATO is not meant for lift-off or touchdown, the lights should
not exceed a height of 25 cm above ground or snow level.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3.22.
5.3.8.1
5.3.8 Aiming point lights
Application
Recommendation.— Where an aiming point marking is
provided at a heliport intended for use at night, aiming
point lights should be provided.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.23.
5.3.8.2
Location
Aiming point lights shall be collocated with the aiming point
marking.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.24.
5.3.8.3
Characteristics
Aiming point lights shall form a pattern of at least six
omnidirectional white lights as shown in Figure 5-6. The lights
shall be inset when a light extending above the surface could
endanger helicopter operations.
10/1/2014 Page 136 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, Figure 5-7.
5.3.8.4
Recommendation.— The light distribution of aiming point
lights should be as shown in Figure 5-11, Illustration 5.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.9.
5.3.9.1
5.3.9 Touchdown and lift-off area lighting system
Application
A TLOF lighting system shall be provided at a heliport
intended for use at night.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.10. Item c) is not specified.
5.3.9.2
The TLOF lighting system for a surface-level heliport shall
consist of one or more of the following:
a) perimeter lights; or
b) floodlighting; or
c) arrays of segmented point source lighting (ASPSL)
or luminescent panel (LP) lighting to identify the
TLOF when a) and b) are not practicable and FATO
lights are available.
10/1/2014 Page 137 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.12. Perimeter lights and
floodlighting are specified;
no provision for ASPL or
LPs.
5.3.9.3
The TLOF lighting system for an elevated heliport or helideck
shall consist of:
a) perimeter lights; and
b) ASPSL and/or LPs to identify the touchdown
marking where it is provided and/or floodlighting to
illuminate the TLOF.
Note.— At elevated heliports and helidecks, surface
texture cues within the TLOF are essential for helicopter
positioning during the final approach and landing. Such
cues can be provided using various forms of lighting
(ASPSL, LP, floodlights or a combination of these lights,
etc.) in addition to perimeter lights. Best results have been
demonstrated by the combination of perimeter lights and
ASPSL in the form of encapsulated strips of light emitting
diodes (LEDs) to identify the touchdown and heliport
identification markings.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.9.4
Recommendation.— TLOF ASPSL and/or LPs to identify the
touchdown marking and/or floodlighting should be
provided at a surface-level heliport intended for use at night
when enhanced surface texture cues are required.
10/1/2014 Page 138 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.13. TALO perimeter lights
should either be placed: a)
along the edge of the TALO
or within 1500 mm from the
edge; or b) along the edge
of the usable area of an
elevated heliport. (This may
be at a dimension less than
the FATO but should be at
least at a distance of 1500
mm surrounding the
TALO); and c) where the
TALO is a circle, the lights
should be located on
straight lines in a pattern
that will provide information
to pilots on drift
displacement.
5.3.9.5
Location
TLOF perimeter lights shall be placed along the edge of the
area designated for use as the TLOF or within a distance of
1.5 m from the edge. Where the TLOF is a circle the lights
shall be:
a) located on straight lines in a pattern which will
provide information to pilots on drift displacement;
and
b) where a) is not practicable, evenly spaced around the
perimeter of the TLOF at the appropriate interval,
except that over a sector of 45 degrees the lights
shall be spaced at half spacing.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.14. TALO perimeter lights
should be uniformly spaced
at intervals of not more than
3000 mm for elevated
heliports and helidecks and
not more than 5000 mm for
surface level heliports.
There should be a minimum
number of eight lights with
three lights on each side
(including the lights at each
corner).
5.3.9.6
TLOF perimeter lights shall be uniformly spaced at intervals of
not more than 3 m for elevated heliports and helidecks and not
more than 5 m for surface-level heliports. There shall be a
minimum number of four lights on each side including a light
at each corner. For a circular TLOF, where lights are installed
in accordance with 5.3.9.5 b) there shall be a minimum of
fourteen lights.
Note.— Guidance on this issue is contained in the
Heliport Manual (Doc 9261).
10/1/2014 Page 139 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.15.
5.3.9.7
The TLOF perimeter lights shall be installed at an elevated
heliport or fixed helideck such that the pattern cannot be seen
by the pilot from below the elevation of the TLOF.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.16.
5.3.9.8
The TLOF perimeter lights shall be installed at a floating
helideck, such that the pattern cannot be seen by the pilot
from below the elevation of the TLOF when the helideck is
level.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.9.9
On surface-level heliports, ASPSL or LPs, if provided to
identify the TLOF, shall be placed along the marking
designating the edge of the TLOF. Where the TLOF is a circle,
they shall be located on straight lines circumscribing the area.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.9.10
On surface-level heliports the minimum number of LPs on a
TLOF shall be nine. The total length of LPs in a pattern shall
not be less than 50 per cent of the length of the pattern. There
shall be an odd number with a minimum number of three
panels on each side of the TLOF including a panel at each
corner. LPs shall be uniformly spaced with a distance between
adjacent panel ends of not more than 5 m on each side of the
TLOF.
10/1/2014 Page 140 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.9.11
Recommendation.— When LPs are used on an elevated
heliport or helideck to enhance surface texture cues, the
panels should not be placed adjacent to the perimeter lights.
They should be placed around a touchdown marking where
it is provided or coincident with heliport identification
marking.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.17.
5.3.9.12
TLOF floodlights shall be located so as to avoid glare to
pilots in flight or to personnel working on the area. The
arrangement and aiming of floodlights shall be such that
shadows are kept to a minimum.
Note.— ASPSL and LPs used to designate the
touchdown and/or heliport identification marking have
been shown to provide enhanced surface texture cues when
compared to low-level floodlights. Due to the risk of
misalignment, if floodlights are used, there will be a need for
them to be checked periodically to ensure they remain
within the specifications contained within 5.3.9.
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.18. Yellow, rather than green.
5.3.9.13
Characteristics
The TLOF perimeter lights shall be fixed omnidirectional lights
showing green.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.9.14
At a surface-level heliport, ASPSL or LPs shall emit green
light when used to define the perimeter of the TLOF.
10/1/2014 Page 141 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.9.15
Recommendation.— The chromaticity and luminance of
colours of LPs should conform to Annex 14, Volume I,
Appendix 1, 3.4.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.9.16
A LP shall have a minimum width of 6 cm. The panel housing
shall be the same colour as the marking it defines.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3.19.
5.3.9.17
Recommendation.— The perimeter lights should not exceed
a height of 25 cm and should be inset when a light extending
above the surface could endanger helicopter operations.
Different in
character or
other means of
compliance
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3.20. TALO floodlighting, if
mounted on the perimeter,
should not exceed a height
of 250 mm.
5.3.9.18
Recommendation.— When located within the safety area of a
heliport or within the obstacle-free sector of a helideck, the
TLOF floodlights should not exceed a height of 25 cm.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.9.19
The LPs shall not extend above the surface by more than 2.5
cm.
10/1/2014 Page 142 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.9.20
Recommendation.— The light distribution of the perimeter
lights should be as shown in Figure 5-11, Illustration 6.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.9.21
Recommendation.— The light distribution of the LPs should
be as shown in Figure 5-11, Illustration 7.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.21.
5.3.9.22
The spectral distribution of TLOF area floodlights shall be
such that the surface and obstacle marking can be correctly
identified.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.9.23
Recommendation.— The average horizontal illuminance of
the floodlighting should be at least 10 lux, with a uniformity
ratio (average to minimum) of not more than 8:1 measured
on the surface of the TLOF.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.9.24
Recommendation.— Lighting used to identify the touchdown
marking should comprise a segmented circle of
omnidirectional ASPSL strips showing yellow. The segments
should consist of ASPSL strips, and the total length of the
ASPSL strips should not be less than 50 per cent of the
circumference of the circle.
10/1/2014 Page 143 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.9.25
Recommendation.— If utilized, the heliport identification
marking lighting should be omnidirectional showing green.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.10.1
5.3.10 Winching area floodlighting
Application
Winching area floodlighting shall be provided at a winching
area intended for use at night.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.10.2
Location
Winching area floodlights shall be located so as to avoid
glare to pilots in flight or to personnel working on the area.
The arrangement and aiming of floodlights shall be such that
shadows are kept to a minimum.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.10.3
Characteristics
The spectral distribution of winching area floodlights shall be
such that the surface and obstacle markings can be correctly
identified.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3. Not specified.
5.3.10.4
Recommendation.— The average horizontal illuminance
should be at least 10 lux, measured on the surface of the
winching area.
10/1/2014 Page 144 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Not ApplicableChapter 5
Reference
Note
Compliance data not
required for Notes.5.3.11
Taxiway lights
Note.— The specifications for taxiway centre line lights
and taxiway edge lights in Annex 14, Volume I, 5.3.17 and
5.3.18, are equally applicable to taxiways intended for
ground taxiing of helicopters.
Not ApplicableChapter 5
Reference
Note
Compliance data not
required for Notes.5.3.12
Visual aids for denoting obstacles
Note.— The specifications for marking and lighting of
obstacles included in Annex 14, Volume I, Chapter 6, are
equally applicable to heliports and winching areas.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.26.
5.3.13.1
5.3.13 Floodlighting of obstacles
Application
At a heliport intended for use at night, obstacles shall be
floodlighted if it is not possible to display obstacle lights on
them.
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Standard
AC139-8, 5.3.26.
5.3.13.2
Location
Obstacle floodlights shall be arranged so as to illuminate the
entire obstacle and as far as practicable in a manner so as not
to dazzle the helicopter pilots.
10/1/2014 Page 145 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
No DifferenceChapter 5
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8, 5.3.26.
5.3.13.3
Characteristics
Recommendation.— Obstacle floodlighting should be such
as to produce a luminance of at least 10 cd/m2.
10/1/2014 Page 146 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 6
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8. Not specified.
6.1.1
CHAPTER 6. HELIPORT
SERVICES
6.1 Rescue and fire fighting
General
Introductory Note.— These specifications apply to
surface-level heliports and elevated heliports only. The
specifications complement those in Annex 14, Volume I, 9.2
concerning rescue and fire fighting requirements at
aerodromes.
The principal objective of a rescue and fire fighting
service is to save lives. For this reason, the provision of
means of dealing with a helicopter accident or incident
occurring at or in the immediate vicinity of a heliport
assumes primary importance because it is within this area
that there are the greatest opportunities of saving lives. This
must assume at all times the possibility of, and need for,
extinguishing a fire which may occur either immediately
following a helicopter accident or incident or at any time
during rescue operations.
The most important factors bearing on effective rescue in
a survivable helicopter accident are the training received,
the effectiveness of the equipment and the speed with which
personnel and equipment designated for rescue and fire
fighting purposes can be put into use.
For an elevated heliport, requirements to protect any
building or structure on which the heliport is located are
not taken into account.
Rescue and fire fighting requirements for helidecks may
be found in the Heliport Manual (Doc 9261).
Level of protection to be provided
Recommendation.— The level of protection to be provided
for rescue and fire fighting should be based on the overall
length of the longest helicopter normally using the heliport
10/1/2014 Page 147 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
and in accordance with the heliport fire fighting category
determined from Table 6-1, except at an unattended heliport
with a low movement rate.
Note.— Guidance to assist the appropriate authority in
providing rescue and fire fighting equipment and services at
surface-level and elevated heliports is given in the Heliport
Manual (Doc 9261).
Table 6-1. Heliport fire fighting category
Category Helicopter overall lengtha
H1 up to
but not including 15 m
H2 from 15
m up to but not including 24 m
H3 from 24
m up to but not including 35 m
a. Helicopter length, including the tail
boom and the rotors.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 6
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8. Not specified.
6.1.2
Recommendation.— During anticipated periods of
operations by smaller helicopters, the heliport fire fighting
category may be reduced to that of the highest category of
helicopter planned to use the heliport during that time.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 6
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8. Not specified.
6.1.3
Extinguishing agents
Recommendation.— The principal extinguishing agent
should be a foam meeting the minimum performance level B.
Note.— Information on the required physical properties
and fire extinguishing performance criteria needed for a
foam to achieve an acceptable performance level B rating is
given in the Airport Services Manual, Part 1 (Doc 9137).
10/1/2014 Page 148 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 6
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8. Not specified.
6.1.4
Recommendation.— The amounts of water for foam
production and the complementary agents to be provided
should be in accordance with the heliport fire fighting
category determined under 6.1.1 and Table 6-2 or Table 6-3
as appropriate.
Note.— The amounts of water specified for elevated
heliports do not have to be stored on or adjacent to the
heliport if there is a suitable adjacent pressurized water
main system capable of sustaining the required discharge
rate.
Table 6-2. Minimum usable amounts of extinguishing agents
for surface-level heliports
Foam meeting performance level B Complementary agents
Cateogry Water (L) Discharge rate foam solution
(L/min) Dry chemical powders (kg) Halons
(kg) CO2 (kg)
or
or
(1) (2) (3) (4)
(5) (6)
H1 500 250 23
23 45
H2 1 000 500 45
45 90
H3 1 600 800 90
90 180
Table 6-3. Minimum usable amounts of extinguishing agents
for elevated heliports
Foam meeting performance level B Complementary agents
Cateogry Water (L) Discharge rate foam solution
(L/min) Dry chemical powders (kg) Halons
(kg) CO2 (kg)
10/1/2014 Page 149 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
or
or
(1) (2) (3) (4)
(5) (6)
H1 2 500 250 45
45 90
H2 5 000 500 45
45 90
H3 8 000 800 45
45 90
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 6
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8. Not specified.
6.1.5
Recommendation.— At a surface-level heliport it is
permissible to replace all or part of the amount of water for
foam production by complementary agents.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 6
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8. Not specified.
6.1.6
Recommendation.— The discharge rate of the foam solution
should not be less than the rates shown in Table 6-2 or Table
6-3 as appropriate. The discharge rate of complementary
agents should be selected for optimum effectiveness of the
agent used.
10/1/2014 Page 150 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 6
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8. Not specified.
6.1.7
Recommendation.— At an elevated heliport, at least one
hose spray line capable of delivering foam in a jet spray
pattern at 250 L/min should be provided. Additionally at
elevated heliports in categories 2 and 3, at least two
monitors should be provided each having a capability of
achieving the required discharge rate and positioned at
different locations around the heliports so as to ensure the
application of foam to any part of the heliport under any
weather condition and to minimize the possibility of both
monitors being impaired by a helicopter accident.
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 6
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8. Not specified.
6.1.8
Rescue equipment
Recommendation.— At an elevated heliport rescue
equipment should be stored adjacent to the heliport.
Note.— Guidance on the rescue equipment to be
provided at a heliport is given in the Heliport Manual (Doc
9261).
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 6
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8. Not specified.
6.1.9
Response time
Recommendation.— At a surface-level heliport, the
operational objective of the rescue and fire fighting service
should be to achieve response times not exceeding two
minutes in optimum conditions of visibility and surface
conditions.
Note.— Response time is considered to be the time
between the initial call to the rescue and fire fighting service
and the time when the first responding vehicle(s) (the
service) is (are) in position to apply foam at a rate of at least
50 per cent of the discharge rate specified in Table 6-2.
10/1/2014 Page 151 of 152
Annex Reference Comments including the
reason for the difference
AERODROMES
Annex 14, Volume 2, Amendment 6
Standard or Recommended Practice
New Zealand
State Legislation,
Regulation or Document
Reference
Level of
implementation
of SARP's
Text of the difference to be
notified to ICAO
Compliance Checklist (CC) / Electronic Filing of Differences (EFOD)
Report on entire Annex
FOURTH EDITION VOLUME II - JULY 2013
Less protective
or partially
implemented or
not
implemented
Chapter 6
Reference
Recommendation
AC139-8. Not specified.
6.1.10
Recommendation.— At an elevated heliport, the rescue and
fire fighting service should be immediately available on or in
the vicinity of the heliport while helicopter movements are
taking place.
- END -
10/1/2014 Page 152 of 152